State’s biggest water reform: Where it’s been, where it’s headed

By Jason W. Brooks
Mail | X: @JasonWBrooks2

The moment the Arizona Legislature and governor passed arguably the most sweeping set of water use and distribution reforms in state history, Arizona’s population was about 2.72 million, though it had grown 55% over the previous decade.

Maricopa County had grown by more than 4% in each year of that decade.

Gov. Bruce Babbitt signed the Arizona Groundwater Management Act into law June 12, 1980.

The legislation, which Babbitt has always contended was essential at the time, established a handful of active management areas with water supply and flow restrictions that didn’t apply to the rest of the state, along with creating the Arizona Department of Water Resources and other provisions.

Since 1980, the state Legislature, governor and others have made a few impactful changes, and between scarcity and the push to use even more Arizona land for new housing, some are pushing for even bigger, sweeping changes that would update or impact the 1980 or other acts.

State legislation in 2025?

With high voter turnout, a few legislative seats and even the party majority in doubt in both chambers of the Arizona Legislature, officials and even candidates have been reluctant to detail proposed changes much in 2024.

Ryan Peters, the city of Chandler’s director of strategic initiatives, said he doesn’t expect to hear much about proposed changes until it is known who will be in the Legislature in January.

And Arizonans might need to wait until the session starts to hear any detailed proposals.

“We are not currently aware of any water legislation we expect to oppose or support,” Peters said. “Unfortunately, we don’t officially know what legislation will be introduced yet as many are focused on getting through the election.”

Peters works closely with Chandler Mayor Kevin Hartke, who currently chairs the top committee with both the Maricopa Association of Governments and the League of Arizona Cities and Towns. Both organizations are impacted by major government water-supply decisions.

Low water levels at Wahweap Bay at Lake Powell along the Upper Colorado River Basin are pictured at the Utah-Arizona state line at Wahweap in June 2021. Types of new restrictions or accountability lawmakers will apply in the years ahead is unclear.

The Associated Press file/Ross D. Franklin

When asked about what battles might lie ahead in Washington, D.C., or in interstate disputes, candidates and incumbents alike have often taken the safe approach of reiterating they’ll keep voicing the interests of their area jurisdiction.

When asked during an Oct. 8 Clean Elections Congressional race interview, House District 1 hopeful Amish Shah pointed out that Gov. Doug Ducey signed the Drought Contingency Plan Authorization Act into law fewer than six years ago — in January 2019 — yet interstate compacts and a long-term plan for Colorado River water and reservoirs has been discussed often since, and at least one new long-term deal is likely needed.

According to the National Integrated Drought Information System, reductions to Arizona’s Colorado River supply under DCP began in 2020. The DCP agreements run through 2026. It is anticipated new rules will be negotiated and put into effect after 2026.

Governor’s Council recommendation

One group calling for specific changes is Gov. Katie Hobbs’ own Governor’s Water Policy Council. Last November the council submitted detailed recommendations to Hobbs.

The recommendations focused on strengthening the Assured Water Supply Program, managing rural groundwater and protecting groundwater resources “while enabling continued, sustainable growth” according to a news release from the governor’s office.

After 20 committee and subcommittee meetings during a six-month span, the council’s main push seemed to be to find ways to fairly regulate groundwater in the rural majority of the state, where Active Management Areas don’t currently exist.

Haley Paul, the Arizona policy director for Audubon Southwest, wrote an article last November about the recommendations. She points out that the recommendations have much more to say about rural Arizona than the populated areas already part of an AMA.

"There is no groundwater management in these portions of the state,” Paul wrote. “This means the deepest well wins, and this has led to conflicts among neighbors, declining groundwater levels, degraded streams and rivers, and risks to water supplies that cities, farmers, industry, birds, rivers, and habitat all rely on.”

Paul said recommendations include setting up a framework for rural groundwater management areas and increasing data collection and monitoring for groundwater in all parts of the state.

She said she supports recommendations that came from the council’s Assured Water Supply Committee. These include closing the build-to-rent loophole.

“Currently, within AMAs, when single-family homes are built as rentals, not owned by individuals, they do not have to comply with the requirement to have 100 years’ worth of water before building,” Paul wrote.

That committee also recommends closing the “wildcat subdivision” loophole within AMAs, in which six or fewer home lots are subdivided and also duck the 100-year certificate requirement, as well as encouraging more water providers and cities to become “designated” and getting that 100-year supply certified themselves.

There’s also a proposed “alternate designation 100-year supply” that allows new development projects that would use other sources of water, according to Arizona Department of Water Resources Director Tom Buschatzke.

Advocacy for AMA reform

Sarah Porter says Arizona State University’s Kyl Center for Water Policy, which she directs, typically doesn’t get involved in proposing legislation or taking specific positions on proposed legislation. However, the institute has produced significant policy analyses relevant to the Groundwater Management Act, including “The Myth of Safe Yield” and “The Elusive Concept of an Assured Water Supply Requirement.”

Porter points out that in last year’s legislative session, proposed changes to the Groundwater Management Act included closing the build-to-rent loophole and enabling the use of retired irrigation grandfathered rights to satisfy the physical availability requirement for Assured Water Supply purposes.

Porter also pointed out last November’s Governor’s Water Policy Council proposed a framework for groundwater management in rural areas

“The proposed regulatory structure differs significantly from the structure for Active Management Areas,” Porter said.

Porter said the proposed Alternative Designation of Assured Water Supply would really be taking on a longstanding, yet never really addressed head-on, water challenge for the state.

“That would be a significant addition to existing groundwater management regulations,” Porter said.

Jason W. Brooks
News Editor | Chandler Independent

Jason W. Brooks joined Independent Newsmedia, Inc., USA, in July 2021 as an associate editor. After a year covering Buckeye, he has covered Chandler since the fall of 2022, in addition to assisting the Daily Independent throughout his time at INI.

Education: University of New Mexico, bachelor of arts in journalism and mass communication, print emphasis, English minor.

Random Fact: He and his siblings witnessed a Space Shuttle launch and landing in the same year in person, on opposite coasts.

Hobbies: Karaoke, bicycling and American Sign Language.

Community: He supports animal shelters.