Estimated read time: 3-4 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — Funding for the $1 billion-plus Lake Powell Pipeline water project has to start pouring in beginning in 2014 for the project to accommodate anticipated growth in southern Utah, legislative leaders were told Tuesday.
There were no specific recommendations, however, about paying for the pipeline that supporters hope will start delivering Colorado River water to Kane, Washington and Iron counties by 2020.
Options include raising sales taxes, imposing fees on water uses across Utah or setting aside a share of growth in future state sales tax revenues, money that would be used to back state-issued bonds.
There was also the suggestion that some sort of public and private partnership could be put together to finance $60 million through 2015 to cover design and engineering costs and another $1.1 billion over the next three years for construction.
We live in a desert. At some point, you've got to quit saying you've going to manufacture water to irrigate a desert.
–Senate President Michael Waddoups, R-Taylorsville
But some leaders weren't sold on the idea.
"We live in a desert," said Senate President Michael Waddoups, R-Taylorsville, following the presentation to the Legislature's Executive Appropriations Committee. "At some point, you've got to quit saying you've going to manufacture water to irrigate a desert."
The pipeline would carry water 139 miles from Lake Powell to Sand Hollow Reservoir in Washington County. Another 38 miles of pipeline would connect to Iron County. Kane County would also receive water from the project.
Lawmakers were assured that money invested in the project, plus interest, would be repaid by water users in southern Utah over the next 50 years through fees, tax increases or both.
And the committee heard that the Legislature's Water Issues Task Force has talked about the need to let voters in Utah have a say about any statewide tax or fee increase. The task force, however, has not settled on any details, including whether such a vote should be binding.
Rep. Patrick Painter, R-Nephi, the chairman of the task force, told committee members he just wanted them to be aware of the timetable for funding the pipeline project.
"This is a massive undertaking," Painter said, calling for the state to be bold since federal funding for big water projects, like the Central Utah Project, is likely no longer an option.
He said the state could end up spend more than $5 billion over the next 20 years on water projects pending throughout Utah, including the pipeline.
Water is the lubricant of the economy. Without water, we don’t grow.
–Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab
Committee members were less than enthusiastic about the prospect. Senate Budget Chairman Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan, suggested they remember the problems associated with other big water projects over the years.
Hillyard said he doubted there would be support for funding the pipeline at the ballot box beyond the area it would serve.
"You may find a lot of opposition," he said.
Waddoups said he'd rather see another water project delivering Bear River water to northern Utah go forward, saying it should have a higher priority than the Lake Powell pipeline.
But Ron Thompson, general manager of the Washington County Water Conservancy District, said the area would run out of water soon after 2020.
"I'm not really sure where we go if this doesn't come on," Thompson said.
Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab, a member of the task force, said the state must plan for growth.
"Water is the lubricant of the economy. Without water, we don’t grow," Noel said.
Opponents of the pipeline project say it's not needed.
"Washington County is one of the most wasteful water users in the U.S.," said Christi Biniaz of Citizens for Dixie's Future, warning that the actual cost of the pipeline is closer to $2.4 billion.
Biniaz said a statewide subsidy for a "water project that benefits just three counties" doesn't make sense, especially in these difficult financial times.
The state treasurer's office expressed concern about the impact of bonding for the project on the state's AAA credit rating during a task force meeting late Tuesday afternoon.
The advice from state Treasurer Richard Ellis conveyed to the task force was to delay the project until some $2 billion in transportation projects are paid off.
----
Written by Lisa Riley Roche with contributions from John Hollenhorst.
