Laserfiche WebLink
<br />up subsidizing the cost of water to smaller communities; they should pay their~. Mr. lvie <br />mentioned that use of term permits should be discouraged. because it encourages the <br />postponement of long term strategies for providing for a communities' needs. He conduded that <br />he may be in the mar1<et to buy water at some point in the Mure. <br /> <br />C.E. Wiliams then asked whether there will be separate rules for ground water. He indicated that <br />he didn't see hoN the same set of rules could apply to both. He encouraged the Board to stay <br />out of setting costs or rates in water exchanges. He further stated that the State should not be <br />in the business of certifying the existence or available yield of either ground or surface water. <br /> <br />Chairrran Counts indicated that he didn't feel the Board should be involved at that level, since <br />every situation is specific. The contract should be between willing buyers and sellers. The Board <br />should facilitate transfers and act as a moderator in the negotiations between buyers and sellers: <br />cautioned against being too specific in rules, can't possibly CCNef every situation. If unused water <br />and water rights are identified, deals will wor1< themselves out. <br /> <br />Henry Day then asked hoN the Board will handle shortages of water, since no certainty exists in <br />time of drought. Dr. Knowles refelenced the '-/IImer Code provision and indicated that the water <br />bank bill had changed very few provisions relating to water rights. <br /> <br />Richard BoNers indicated that the Board should just get buyers and sellers together. The Board <br />should review water rights infollll.dion, but make no guarantees. Indicated he has further <br />questions about the use r:A term IJCI" .Ii., believes cities rrust CNtTl rights, particularly to ground <br />water. <br /> <br />J.R Prestidge then indicated that three major activities are possible for the bank, act as a <br />registry, investigate the feasibility of transfers, and to assist in the design/application necessary <br />to get a water rights pernVt. <br /> <br />John Wiliams, upon hearing of a possible legislative option of putting a cap on water available <br />for environmental water uses to ina ,ss':! certainty in water rights transfers, indicated that he didn't <br />support fixed pel ce.tages or caps, and that should be detemined on a case-by-<:ase basis. <br /> <br />Buddy Baldridge wanted to knoN t'M:l things: hoN nu:h will the bank cost and hoN will it be <br />funded. Since no fees are to be associated with deposits and lTUlidpalities are exelTllted from <br />the pulchas1! fee, it was stated that the Board would pay for it out of existing funding. <br /> <br />I/oBfre Wfatt. irdcated that the bank could help smaller cities by developing maps and listings <br />to sOON the available water in their area. He also expressed conc:em CNer ground water sales, <br />and wanted to make sure that people didn't drill wells on the extremes of their pi operty so as to <br />sell their neighbor's water. Everyone seemed to calCUr that such an activity would most likely <br />be prohibited, even without the new statute. <br /> <br />C.E. Wiliams again reiterated that the rules should be kept sil1llle. The bank should stay out of <br />the details of transactions, although he expressed conc:em CNer ground water, as well. V\9nted <br />to knoN hoN water quality would be factored in and whether wastewater could be banked. That <br />was explained as a c:ompIicated situation related to adjudication and original supply source of <br />water. <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />. . ~ ~ <br /> <br />~ <br />