By Mary Alice Murphy

The Gila-San Francisco Water Commission, which was formed as the successor to the Southwest New Mexico Water Planning Group named in the Arizona Water Settlements Act, has passed the duties to a new group.

GSFWC was instrumental in creating what would become its successor, the New Mexico Central Arizona Project Entity to oversee the development of a New Mexico Unit.

As the GSFWC was primarily a planning and consulting group, it did not have the funding to proceed with a unit. It did, however, during its years of existence, bring forward many proposals from its members as possibilities for developing the water, as well as creating non-diversion projects. Those proposals became the rationale behind a unit.

At the preceding meeting, Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2016, of the NM CAP Entity, the members voted to accept the transfer of responsibilities from the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission.

Some of the members of the CAP Entity were also members of the GSFWC, representing the same entities, although some were also alternates for other entities.

With a quorum of 11 of the 18 members represented, GSFWC Chairman Anthony Gutierrez called the meeting to order.

The one item on the agenda was to determine a successor to the water commission and to dissolve the GSFWC.

"The Gila-San Francisco Water Commission joint-powers agreement allows for the dissolution," Gutierrez said. "The potential contracts for water and the facilitation of contracts have moved toward the CAP Entity."

He said the formation of the CAP Entity was approved by the New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration on or about July 22, 2015.

Gutierrez noted that the water commission had not entered into contracts and the only asset held is funds put in by the members of the commission.

"After the bills are paid pertaining to assistance from counsel, and other bills related to administrative costs, the remaining funds, about $3,000 will be returned to those entities who had put in funding," Gutierrez said.

Vance Lee, representing on the water commission Hidalgo County and as alternate for the village of Virden, questioned if the group turns over its responsibilities to the CAP Entity, what if the Interstate Stream Commission says no. "What if we decide to dissolve this body and the ISC says it does not want to change the CAP Entity JPA to allow for non-diversion projects?"

Attorney Pete Domenici Jr. said: "I expect we could reconstitute the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission. The ISC has said it will not consider additional non-diversion projects, but I think the only one that could argue to amend the CAP Entity JPA would be that body. My fall back would be to reconstitute this water commission if the ISC is not willing to make changes. I think the ISC will be cautious on back pedaling."

Lee noted that the only responsibility of the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission has been a consulting role to the ISC.

"I wouldn't downplay that role," Domenici said. "That consultation role, I think, gives a better chance for the ISC to recognize the CAP Entity as taking over that role."

Howard Hutchinson, representing the San Francisco Soil and Water Conservation District and the village of Reserve, said he didn't think there was a conflict in the CAP Entity policy statement of expenditures of the New Mexico Unit Fund. "When the unit fund is expended, there will be a separation of the CAP Entity from the ISC, which has control by state statute of the NM Unit Fund."

Gutierrez said he has had discussion about adjudicated water rights and the Globe Agreement and where opportunities may lie for the CAP Entity to create non-New Mexico Unit projects.

"We as the CAP Entity (for which Gutierrez serves as the executive director) think the proposed project fulfills our purpose," he said. "We are taking a good look at everything, not just a huge project on the Gila. I think the NM CAP Entity and the language in the AWSA give us more authority, including putting us in the funding agreement with the ISC and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation."

Hutchinson said he thinks instead of using the non-diversion project phrase, calling it a non-New Mexico Unit project gives the CAP Entity more latitude. Domenici agreed.

Don Stailey, representing the Gila Basin Irrigation Commission on the Gila-
San Francisco Water Commission, said the AWSA is based on a diversion of water from the Gila River. "Sometimes, we venture elsewhere. I think the purpose of the act is to divert."

Allyson Siwik, representing the Gila Conservation Coalition from the audience and saying she is a Grant County resident, said she is concerned that Grant County is no longer represented on the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission, after Gutierrez resigned as county planner.

"I talked to the county manager," Gutierrez said. "She said I had never been replaced on the commission, so I was still the representative of the county."

Siwik also noted that not everyone represented on the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission was part of the NM CAP Entity. "I am concerned that they are not here when you are dissolving the organization. There were voices who had non-diversion or non-New Mexico Unit projects and they are not represented here and won't have a voice."

Gutierrez said he sent out notices to all members of the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission about this meeting. "Those not here were not represented for a long time. We had issues trying to get a quorum. We had talked about dropping representatives who didn't attend. A lot just dropped out and didn't come to meetings. The JPA called for resignation, but they just stopped coming. I wanted to give each one another opportunity to participate, but they aren't here. I appreciate your concern. If they were concerned they would be here."

He said it was evident by the number of those who attend the New Mexico CAP Entity meeting that they take their duties seriously, by sending their alternate, if they are unable to attend. "They don't fail to come. But entities, other than those you see here, were not attending the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission meetings."

Darr Shannon, representing the Hidalgo Soil and Water Conservation District and as alternate for Lordsburg, said, in order to have quorums, "we were allowed to double up because we were representatives and alternates for different groups."

Siwik continued to say she was concerned about disbanding the group, a huge responsibility, without having all the members. "It's pretty grave."

"We sent out meeting notices twice and the agendas," Shannon said. "If they don't come, they don't have the intent to participate."

Domenici noted that the CAP Entity has provisions for new members to join if some member of the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission wishes to join the CAP Entity.

"I don't see the ISC giving the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission a role to push for other proposals," Domenici continued. "It's the CAP Entity pushing for it."

Hueteotl Lopez, a resident, had brought Aldo Leopold Charter School students to the prior CAP Entity meeting, said he had a concern about providing information on other proposals. "I see you moving away from anything but diversion. I would like to see information, not just to disagree, but to provide objectivity. Otherwise, it's looking like you're trying to ram through a diversion."

And then he attacked Gutierrez personally. "And to quit as county planner to be paid to be executive director of this organization. Not to have elections on it, it could be criminal. Put it up to the community to vote to divert. Otherwise, it just stinks."

"I was hired like any other person applying," Gutierrez said. "Whether you agree or not is not relevant. My previous employer knew I was applying for the position."

Domenici said: "Although it sounds like you're paying attention, what you propose is in direct opposition to federal statute. It's why we're doing what we're doing. It's sounds like you are against the statute. None of us put the federal statute into place. It was based on other federal statues, with strict requirements and restrictions, and all kinds of limitations."

Mayor Richard Bauch, representing the village of Santa Clara on the CAP Entity and, as a member of the GSFWC, said: "In reference to those not here. A lot didn't attend the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission meeting when the CAP Entity was created. They had the opportunity to get into the CAP Entity, but opted out. I think the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission has fulfilled its mission."

By motion and approval, the members dissolved the Gila-San Francisco Water Commission and named its successor to be the New Mexico Central Arizona Project Entity.