July 16, 2008

 

City sticks with water game plan

By RICHARD ECKE
Tribune Staff Writer

City commissioners splashed around over the issue of water rights Tuesday evening.

Late Tuesday night, commissioners voted 4-1 to continue what they were doing with the city's water rights, after hearing from a consultant and a Helena lawyer.

Commissioner Mary Jolley was the lone commissioner to vote no.

Jolley questioned why the city agreed to cut the city's claim of 53,574 acre-feet of water down to 20,140 acre-feet two years ago. An earlier report by the city's consultant, Water Right Solutions of Helena, said the reduction was based on the city's population and water needs.

Water Right Solutions official Dave Schmidt, with approval by city staff, amended the city's water claim in 2006, to avoid objections by other water users or the state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation.

Jolley questioned why the city would voluntarily reduce its oldest water right, while at the same time discuss buying expensive water rights from elsewhere. Schmidt explained the city's oldest water rights were for municipal purposes through the 1970s, not future uses.

He said the city later filed for junior water reservations for future needs.

After Tuesday's work session, Jolley appeared resigned to accept what the city did in 2006. However, she said the city should have considered having a more public discussion at that point. And she cast the lone vote against the city's approach Tuesday night.

The water rights discussion featured technical details and an extensive historical background. But the bottom line, according to Schmidt and Helena attorney Harley Harris, was that the city of Great Falls would need to prove it needed extra water decades ago before the state Water Court would agree to restore the claim to 53,574 acre-feet.

"If you've got a real good reason why, you stick with your guns," Harris said. Without such evidence, though, a city is better to keep its water rights request reasonable to proceed "under the radar," he said.

Claiming more water while facing opposition from federal agencies is "very expensive litigation," Harris warned.

"It's crippling," he said.

Schmidt urged commissioners to stick with the city's 2006 reduction. He presented papers in which the state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation labeled the city of Great Falls' earlier water amount as "excessive."

"You're probably in the ballpark of where you'd end up," Harris added.