Editorial board

The Republic | azcentral.com

Two bills would undermine Arizona's long-term water planning

Aimed at Cochise and Yuma counties, the measures have statewide significance

Arizona needs to build on past successes in water policy, not undermine them

You are out in the desert. The sun is high, but your canteen has water. You’ll be fine unless somebody shoots a hole in it.

The canteen represents Arizona’s ground water rules. The Legislature is taking aim with Senate Bill 1400 and Senate Bill 1268.

Don’t pull the trigger, lawmakers.

Our state has a well-deserved reputation for solid water planning.

Yes. There are challenges. Yes. There is a need to identify new sources for the future.

Yes. Some very smart people are looking at what needs to be done.

VALDEZ:Arizona is about to make a California-sized water mistake

But in general, the Groundwater Management Act and subsequent laws set up a system to assure development does not outstrip water supply.

Inside Active Management Areas, developers have to demonstrate an “assured water supply” for at least 100 years, and meet other requirements.

Counties outside the AMAs can opt into less restrictive requirements that also mandate an 'adequate water supply' before development begins. Two counties outside the AMAs have done so: Cochise and Yuma.

This isn’t about stopping development. It’s about facilitating and protecting responsible growth.

Sarah Porter, director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute, said these rules protect a developer who demonstrates an adequate water supply from having a new developers sink more straws into the same supply and deplete it.

PORTER:Water priorities lawmakers should be focusing on

The rules provide consistency and reliability that make economic development possible. They represent a commitment to long-term water security.

SB 1400 gets rid of the adequate water supply rule in Cochise and Yuma counties in mid-2018. County boards of supervisors would have to vote unanimously to extend it for five years.

That hard-to-get unanimous vote would be required every five years in order for a county to remain in the adequate water supply program.

SB 1268 says cities don’t have to follow the adequate water supply rules their counties adopt. They can ignore them. Both bills are sponsored by Sen. Gail Griffin. House Speaker David Gowan is signed on to SB 1268.

These measures could clear the way for proposed Sierra Vista development that the federal government says would deplete the San Pedro River. The bills might earn their sponsors some short-term applause. Gowan, who is running for Congress, might see some bumper-sticker benefit.

But these are special interest measures that would have consequences far beyond this development or the next election.

Water planning is a statewide concern. Arizona should be building on past successes, not undermining them for the sake of immediate gratification.

We live in a desert state. We’ve done some things right. We shouldn’t shoot holes in the canteen.

Arizona's dwindling water supply: