{Editor's Note: This is part 1 of a multi-article series on the NM CAP Entity meeting of April 3, 2018)

By Mary Alice Murphy

The only public input at the April 3, 2018 New Mexico Central Arizona Project Entity regular meeting came from Allyson Siwik, Gila Conservation Coalition executive director.

She said she was troubled that member Howard Hutchinson (representing the San Francisco Soil and Water Conservation District) at the special meeting had said the environmental process on the proposed action of the entity could be accomplished with an environmental assessment rather than a full environmental impact statement.

Siwik noted that under the Endangered Species Act seven endangered or threatened species of fish, bird and reptile would be impacted by changes in the Gila River. The proposed action has determined that a water flow well below the ISC-identified 150 cubic feet per second flow as the minimum, would be part of the project. "It will dewater the river and threaten the riparian areas, as well as the recreation and tourism industry. And you still have not answered who the water is for and who will pay for it. Nor have you determined the economic impacts. It is impossible to do with an environmental assessment. You need a full environmental impact statement."

The first item of old business addressed the proposed second amendment to the joint powers agreement.

CAP Entity Executive Director Anthony Gutierrez said the reason he put the item on the agenda was because of the board requesting additional language on future potential expenditures from the New Mexico Unit Fund.

"I met with Sen. Howie Morales and Rep. Rudy Martinez," Gutierrez said. "I also talked with Angela Quintana of the Department of Finance and Administration. She gave me a lot of information. I was hoping to meet with counsel but was unable to get with Pete Domenici or Lorraine Hollingsworth to formulate the language."

He said Morales and Martinez expressed interest that the entity's proposed action would potentially be paid for using only construction funds.

Quintana told him that the DFA has a committee that can determine if projects applied for meet state requirements if the entity wants to provide funding for water projects in the four counties.

"We will need state approval that we have met requirements if we, as an entity, want to approve other projects," Gutierrez said. "Howie and Rudy also liked our idea of applications to utilize some of the Unit Fund money for other projects. Potentially, our doing that would take legislative action for the programmatic process. The Legislature could name the New Mexico Finance Authority as the place to put the funding. The NMFA has the authority and is probably the best approach."

Chairwoman Darr Shannon, representing the Hidalgo Soil and Water Conservation District, asked Gutierrez for notes on changes made to a previous amendment of the document, "so we know how it's evolving."

Gutierrez noted language in the JPA doesn't say the entity requires a full-blown audit. It just says the entity is subject to the Audit Act.

Aaron Sera, representing the city of Deming, which is the second fiscal agent, said the CAP Entity is subject to the audit rule. "It dictates whether we qualify for a review or a full audit. I can research and find out the requirements. It may require a full audit because of the use of federal funds."

Hutchinson asked if the Gila San Francisco Water Commission, when it was looking at various projects, had to go through NMFA.

Gutierrez said no, because the Interstate Stream Commission did the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations. "The committee used for the evaluations was made up of entities from state agencies that reviewed the applications."

"What I was thinking of when I asked the question were the elements in these projects that may impact the environment and endangered fish," Hutchinson said. "If a group proposed a project, it would have to have the permits in place for it to be part of the review. We could convene a committee or just send the applications to various agencies."

Gutierrez said the programmatic process is already in place and works well. "My recommendation to the board is to use an already existing committee to oversee the application process and vet the applications to make sure they have the match funding and whether their engineering is done. I'm trying to get a program modeled after the programmatic process, so board members don't have to read through every application. The ISC did the process and put money toward several projects which haven't moved for some reason."

Sera said he highly disagreed with potentially using the Colonias process (which Gutierrez had mentioned at a previous meeting). "They have only one engineer and I disagree with putting projects in front of them. We were working well with the ISC. The Colonias Board has problems. NMFA yes, but I had the idea you wanted to use Colonias."

Ty Bays, representing the Grant Soil and Water Conservation District, said he was a bit scared about developing other projects. "I know Morales and Martinez are opposed to what we are doing. Do they have any idea what we are doing? What is their real motive? If they don't have a project, they just want to suck the money away from us."

Gutierrez said the senator and representative were using the infrastructure and capital improvement plans as potential projects. "I don't want to see legislation the same as this year to take $50 million out for whatever. We want the board to have a say in other projects. If $50 million, for instance, goes to the Water Trust Board, we have no say except possibly suing the state of New Mexico. I'm in fear that the longer this goes on that type of bill will go through. Morales and Martinez were adamant that funding needs to go toward the regional water project. I felt it was better to do an application process. Ms. Quintana calmed my fears. I'm not suggesting Colonias as a board. I'm suggesting it as a model."

Sera said it was fine to use a model, such as that of Colonias or the Water Trust Board and give the applications to the ISC to evaluate.

Van "Bucky" Allred, representing Catron County said he echoed what Sera said about the Colonias Board. "Talking about Morales and Martinez, you might remind Mr. Morales that he also represents Catron County and doesn't always. I would like to see you talk to Rep. Gail Armstrong. I would like for Mr. Morales to realize he's leaving Catron County behind."

Gutierrez said he had not had time to meet with Sen. John Arthur Smith or Reps. Rebecca Dow, Armstrong and Candie Sweetser.

"I agree with getting input on the model," Vance Lee, representing Hidalgo County, said. "Bring people in to better understand what we need to know to evaluate projects. I want to see the CAP Entity and the ISC in consultation on putting out the money."

Hutchinson said the Water Trust Board is also problematic. "I know the soil and water conservation districts have had problems. We run up against competition from Bernalillo County, Albuquerque, Santa Fe and Las Cruces. They can afford expensive grant writers. It's not so much whether the project can be beneficial to the state of New Mexico, but the quality of the grant writing. What may be considered beneficial to Albuquerque may not bring the same benefit to the San Francisco Soil and Water Conservation District, where we need watershed restoration. The original language of the legislation was very specific to riparian restoration and watershed restoration, but they got an amendment to let municipalities get the funding. A lot of entities have stopped trying to get funding through the Water Trust Board, because of that."

"With the ISC, we had an identified process, and we awarded and gave out money," he continued. "We should stick with what works for us."

Shannon said what the CAP Entity is willing to do is to fund conservation projects "for the benefit of the good. We want to spend money on this type of project. We need to create our own destiny."

To a question about whether Morales or Martinez suggested the change, Gutierrez said it was his recommendation. "I am a certified grant writer. I don't want to lose our having the final say on what we want to do. I want to let the legislators know we want to do this, and we have good models to follow without sending it to another board."

Sera said he thought modeling was fine, but "they need to be vetted by the ISC and come to this board for final approval. Do we want to do this before the project begins? Maybe language should say something like the money becomes available after the project work is done."

Campbell agreed that it is a lot of money in the Unit Fund and a lot of politicians looking at what they think they can use it for. "We need to always be in the position to say yes or no up front."

"They have to be conservation projects that went through the process," Shannon concurred.

Gutierrez noted that several that were funded by the ISC have not been completed.

Shannon asked if the reason was the CAP Entity or the ISC or because the entity being awarded the money hasn't been able to get them completed. "If we have stricter criteria and more vetting, I don't understand why it wouldn't work."

Gutierrez said the reason some aren't completed is because they have to reach certain criteria, and they have to have the design, the engineering and the match money. "If we have a program that says these certain elements will have to be completed first, then it will work."

He said the additional market value of the fund is now at $5.8 million, whereas the number was $2.4 million. "A lot of money is being made on the fund and the investments. $5.8 million is a lot of money for the four-county region. We have to be smart about the joint powers agreement and put in language that is satisfactory for all stakeholders, including the Legislature. If we take the program to the Legislature and they say, 'oh, yeah, this will work. It will make money. It will leave the corpus, but you have enough to fund projects.' I think that's what we have to sell, for lack of a better term."

"If we create a stricter application with all these criteria and have the items listed, why can't we make our own decisions, instead of having another government entity make them for us?" Shannon asked.

Gutierrez noted that if it were, for example, for a drinking water application, it would have to go through the Water Quality Bureau. "There are things we need to get into the language that indicates that applications may have to go through other agencies. I have a lot of notes, and I think we have had enough comments to put together a draft."

Campbell made a motion for the board discontinue the discussion, allow Gutierrez to put together a draft and bring it back next month. It was seconded and approved.

The next article will talk about a letter that had errors but was used in the fiscal impact of the bill that was sponsored by Morales and Martinez in the last legislative session to pull $50 million out of the New Mexico Unit Fund.