By Mary Alice Murphy

Rosemary Romero, consultant for several regions that are part of the ISC regional water planning program, opened the meeting on Thursday, June 9, 2016.

Joanne Hilton, hydrologist for the program, said she and Romero had input a lot of edits on the executive summary and sections 2 and 8 of the draft from comments made during the previous meeting of the steering committee and stakeholders.

"The Interstate Stream Commission Technical Team is looking at the hydrographs of the groundwater levels, to determine whether they are diminishing, stable or recovering," Hilton said.

She said one of the edits made was to provide consistency in the title of the Grant County Regional Water Supply Project.

She handed out copies of section 8, which showed the changes. On the section on banking water credits, she asked for clarification.

New Mexico Central Arizona Project Entity Executive Director Anthony Gutierrez explained that once water credits are purchased in the exchange for water from the Gila River in New Mexico, the water is available to the Gila River Indian Community, whether the water has been stored in New Mexico or not.

Allyson Siwik, Gila Conservation Coalition executive director, said a $10 million Water Trust Board funding under water quality protection did not make the list. It was for clean up of tailings and for the regional wastewater treatment facility

Robert Esqueda, Silver City Utilities director, said the funding was used to protect groundwater.

Priscilla Lucero, Southwest New Mexico Council of Governments executive director, noted the project was ongoing.

Siwik also pointed out, under the U.S.-Mexico border projects, that the New Mexico State University Water Resources Research Institute is doing a bi-national water mapping and assessment project.

Another discussion ensued on the wording on the flood control dams, where they were and how they should be described. The words sedimentation and recreation were added in front of dams in the region.

"That is what I see at the state level down to the local level," Lucero said. "We need to make it consistent. Now there is more scrutiny for every public dollar and through the funding systems."

Nick Deubel of Integrated Forestry said he saw that the word collaborative had been taken out of some of the language, as had been decided at the last meeting, but "I see no impetus for groups to work together. Non-collaboration is causing unintended consequences."

[Editor's Note: The word had been taken out to show that some issues/projects had not reached consensus in the group.]

Hilton said the Southwest Regional Water Plan was slated to go before the ISC on October 20, along with other southern New Mexico plans at a meeting in Truth or Consequences.

She said a person had been assigned to fact check what would be in the final plan. Several comments on modeling and assumptions on groundwater declines had been received and were being reviewed.

Siwik asked if the ISC had created criteria for looking at the comments and wondered if it would be available. "Is the Technical Team ISC staff or contracted engineers or hydrologists?"

Hilton replied: "Both," and said that the team had Tom Morrison of the ISC and Beth Salvas of D.B. Stephens and Associates, among others on the team.

"We have relayed that you are interested in closing the loop and seeing the revised plan," Hilton said.

"Is there any opportunity for confirming troublesome points?" Siwik asked.

Hilton suggested there might be an earlier conference call after the memo is complete and then a final conference call before the group goes before the ISC for approval of the plan.

Romero asked if implementation of the plan could stay with the Southwest NM COG, because it is the keeper of the master lists. She said it would be helpful for the group to be thinking about "X," and what it wanted to pursue, as well as who would update the Projects, Programs and Policies document.

Lucero said the question would go before the COG Board, which has every government entity represented, but not the acequias. "The board could talk about a group to meet annually, for instance. It is critical to have all entities represented."

She said forums could be held with another layer below the COG, but "I have seen that group go off in different directions. I like the momentum of this group."

Romero pointed out the Steering Committee includes agencies not under the COG.

"Let the Steering Committee determine what method to use to continue the process," Lucero said.

Romero asked if anyone had any thoughts about a public meeting to roll the plan out. She said a press release might invite people to a presentation on what members of the steering committee had accomplished, with maybe a condensed version of the strategies and lead groups, for example.

Siwik said members of the environmental community still have some "pretty significant issues with some items in the plan."

Lucero said, when the roll out happens, the plan could be posted on local governmental websites and that of other organizations.

Romero said it would be on the ISC website. "The ISC is not making hard copies of the final plans, and no disks. They will all be online only." She said she would give an updated master list to Lucero.