Editor's Note: This is late because this reporter could not attend the meeting and finally had a chance to listen to the recording.

By Mary Alice Murphy

Tuesday morning, at the Interim Legislative Water and Natural Resources Committee meeting at the Western New Mexico University J. Cloyd Miller Library, Deborah Dixon, P.E., Interstate Stream Commission director, and Eileen Dodds, New Mexico Water Dialogue secretary-treasurer, gave the first presentation on Regional Water Planning Process and Status.

"Why are we planning?" Dixon asked. "The needs for water are great and the amounts limited. For the past two years especially, we have recognized the needs for planning. The needs to take in account include growth issues, water quality, the issue of non-renewable groundwater, economic advancement and protecting the environment."

She said the priorities include meeting future water needs, receiving public input, developing plans and aligning funding needs for the future.

Water planning began in the 1987 legislative session and the ISC was given the responsibility to manage planning. "At the time, we set up 16 districts, which are a hybrid of political and hydrological districts," Dixon said. "The first plan we completed in 1999 and the last in 2008. Each region is unique, so by taking responsibility each can meet its needs. We use the regional plans to develop the overall state water plan."

In 2003, the state established criteria, which included stewardship of the state's water, by protecting and maintaining water rights and priorities, customs, cultures, and water supply and quality.

Also in 2003, the state established common goals for the state, using strong relevant data and creating a tool to educate the public on sustainable water supply.

"In 2013, an update of the regional plans was warranted," Dixon said. "The drought was ongoing, the state population hit 2 million, projections showed increased water needs, and climate change was happening. Interbasin transfers are being proposed."

She said for the 2003 regional plans, each region used different assumptions, which made it a challenge to put them into a state water plan. "In 2013, we had funding limitations, so the ISC and the Office of the State Engineer developed a modified plan for updating the plans. To take the 16 plans to more efficiently roll them into the state plan, we developed a template, which would save the region financing their plans. Another goal was to more consistently make the plans comparable using data with similar assumptions. We created a handbook, with guidelines for the same seven areas of interest in each regional plan. Public meetings are state facilitated. We held more than 50 meetings last year."

"The regions are responsible for developing their strategies, with policies and procedures, and projects," Dixon continued. "The technical data is being finalized to provide them to the regions. We had $400,000 in the budget for the water planning. It was allocated so each region had a number of meetings."

The state took the lead in this update, to compile the technical data, and assess the water management issues in each region. "The ISC did a lot of the legal analyses and research, using OSE projection methodology. The technical background will address the administrative water supply, stream gauges, groundwater modeling, population projections, all with consistent assumptions."

"We discussed with each region to ask them to align their projects, so they are more appropriate for the Water Trust Board," Dixon said, "with an emphasis on region-wide projects. To meet the accelerated timeframe for completion, this process was most reasonable for consistency."

She noted that some groups think a water budget is important. "We are encouraging them to follow what they need to do."

Since 2014, stakeholder groups and steering committees have been formed, with the steering committees creating the public involvement plan for each region.

The committees are influenced by diverse representation of different water use groups, Dixon said.

She introduced Dodds of the Water Dialogue, which has helped the ISC in the process.

"On July 28, we held a workshop to address the plans," Dodds said. "We talked about the challenges, the successes, the format and concerns. We heard disappointment on the technical data between supply and demand and the gap. We heard about the inequity between small and large projects in the regions. There has been little involvement by the pueblos, because participation has been spotty. We considered the governance by creating a working group to make groups more effective. The regions need to be brought together to resolve conflicts.

"The current approach is dramatically underfunded for a constrained timeline," Dodds said. "Each region will see a draft by the end of the year. The Water Dialogue is willing to work with the ISC to get this done."

"We appreciated the meeting," Dixon said. "We were listening. We will modify the process going forward and for next time. Meetings need to be continuous with the 2008 and 1999 plans. It's hard to ramp up again. We need more continuous dialogue, with perhaps more regional meetings. Some changes may be made because this process is too top down. We may change from the first plans being too bottom up to have more balance. Experts are reviewing the legal, the technical, compact compliance and hydrologic reviews before we give the drafts to the regions. We will expect them to give feedback on their region's draft plan. We want to have this done by early fall, so we can have meetings to take the plans to their final version. Our message to them will be how much they need, if state funds are their top priority. We find more interest in policies on projects."

She said the next deadline was going to be June 30, 2016, but "we may slow down to give them a little more time. We recognize the native nations have not been involved. The ISC will facilitate a meeting to let them know and get their input. We want to keep the groups alive. The ultimate goal is to work together and update the state plan. We are looking at 2017 to roll the regional plans into an effective, meaningful state plan, taking the regional plans and prioritizing them. At some point in a couple of years, we will see where the Water Resource and Research Institute report takes us and put it into the plan."

To a question, Dixon said in the past 20 years, the state has spent about $4 million on the water plans. "A lot of Western states are trying to figure out how much to spend to get good plans."

Rep. Larry A. Larrañaga said the first thing he wanted to do was apologize to the ISC. "I think the ISC was maligned yesterday during its presentations. I've been on this committee for 20 years, and we've always been civil even when we disagree and we do. I want to personally apologize for part of yesterday's meeting. That was not representative of this committee."

He asked if a different model needed to be looked at for the plans.

"The feedback we are getting from the regions is that the model needs improvement," Dixon said. "It is worthy of evaluating because it is necessary for all Western states, so we are good stewards of the water we do have. I want the regional and state water plans to be a good product that continue to provide value."

"Should we look at recurring funds for the process?" Larrañaga asked.

"The Water Dialogue would be happy to see recurring funds," Dodds said. "We don't just want a check box to show that the plan was done and put into a file. We need to continue to stay ahead of whatever is coming into play."

"We need to have a discussion on adequate funding," Larrañaga said. "We know it's an important issue. Let's have the discussion between now and when we develop the budget."

Committee Chairman Peter Wirth said he thought the group respected the presentations. "We continue to bring in both sides, but I agree that it has to be done respectfully. We need both sides so we can learn."

Larrañaga noted that he had issues and talked to staff about them. "This is not a committee to listen to legal issues."

Rep. Paul Bandy said for strategic plans for policy and project development, funding was set up in the Constitution for the Rio Grande. "It is almost depleted. It would seem more prudent to leave in the Land Grant Fund for projects rather than being used for everyday operations."

Dixon said the agency had to use the fund for basic expenditures, because the budget line item was vetoed. "We all struggle with funding and whether we should save money for more important issues. We try to balance how to manage the funds. We have to manage the compacts as our No. 1 priority."

"I question the constitutionality of using funds set aside for projects for operations," Bandy continued. "What about climate change?"

"I am not an expert in that area," Dixon said. "The Office of the State Engineer prepared a report."

"The state is 100 years behind on adjudication," Bandy said. "The older the right, the better the right. What's the point of this plan?"

"If a water source is finite, we need to plan," Dixon said. "We know if it continues as is, we need to consider new sources, desalinization, transferring from where it's not used to where it's needed. There is always room for improvement."

"I stress how important it is to finish adjudication," Bandy said, "so we know who has the right."

Sen. Gerald Ortiz y Pino said at the Water Dialogue meeting not one person agreed with another on how to estimate the water supply. "If we started with the top down and at the bottom, the regions don't agree with how the plan is being done, it's not worth pursuing."

"You have a point," Dodds said. "However, Dixon has agreed to work with the regions. Maybe not this time, but as an ongoing process."

"I thought a few could live with what we had developed," Dixon said. "Some of the smaller regions don't have the resources to get the data. Our approach is to provide the framework. The regions could still create their policies, procedures and projects without agreeing with the water flow data."

"Will you sign on with the WRRI methodology?" Ortiz y Pino asked.

"We heard several who thought the data might be more appropriate to what we're doing," Dixon said.

Dodds added that another source could be used, because she was not sure the Middle Rio Grande would be happy seeking more information.

Ortiz Y Pino noted that the supply and demand is always hard to meet. "We have willy-nilly development in the Middle Rio Grande. The Albuquerque water utility said it was no problem. As for adjudication, yes, you have the right, but if the ditch is dry, we're dealing in fantasyland. I will propose nothing is more important than planning, but we need to do it in a way that is real. Fund it adequately. I'm not sure the ISC should be the planning agency. Their mission is compact management and delivery. I will give it more thought."

Bandy noted that the state needs to transfer water from lower priorities, such as ag, to higher use in municipalities and industry, if the adjudication is complete.

"We are not doing this in a vacuum," Dixon pointed out. "We are statutorily responsible for doing this water plan. It is complementary to managing water for the compacts. I would submit that we are the right agency."

Rep. Sharon Clahchiscilliage thanked the panelists for making the statement that they wanted to work with the native populations.

"The Animas River spill has brought us a tremendous amount of concern," Clahchiscilliage said. "We looked at the lack of coordination. It is difficult for state government to coordinate with the Navajo Nation, because of the involvement of how an entity responds to emergencies. The Animas River emergency ended at the reservation. It made it like from the point of origin to Hogback. The federal government consistently told us everything is OK. The feds, all the way up to the President's office, could have resolved it. The federal barrier should have been lifted so the entire river was the emergency. The EPA did not arrive until days later because of jurisdiction issues. The Navajo Nation became aware of what the state, San Juan County, and the city were doing, so we could start asking the right questions. Yes, native governments need to be included. The federal government seemed to think we know how, where and when to implement actions. I encourage you to include the tribes so the processes are known. It will reveal how native governments can respond."

Sen Cisco McSorley said: "As the former chair of the Judiciary Committee, we held a hearing on issues of impeachment. We have to be courteous, but we have to understand issues we fail to explore. We need the facts to come out. We need a balance of respect, while we delve for information.

"You have an ambitious final product," McSorley said. "What is the price tag?"

"To accomplish the original plan of being done by June 30, 2016, we feel it is not possible," Dixon said. "We will slow down broadly and plan on the regional plans being complete by the end of the calendar year 2016 and at the end of 2017 for the state plan. The dilemma is that we have not talked to the regions about this. We'll make it happen. Could it be a better product? Yes, if we have more funding and could allocate some to the regions."

McSorley asked how much was budgeted for the plan.

"We have two persons who are full-time planners," Dixon said. "We are also using part-time help from other projects. It is about $250,000 above what we have allocated for staff."

"Would it be worthwhile to do a formal mediation with groups that have concerns?" McSorley asked. "It seems to me we have to have everyone on board. What steps could you take to reach consensus?"

"We feel like the process with the common technical platform is where there is the greatest conflict," Dixon said. "We think we will still give valid plans, with the exception of the Middle Rio Grande and others that want a water budget.

"We are not getting into the details of planning projects," she continued. "Yes, there is between supply and demand, no gap, some gap and a lot of gap, but I'm not sure the details are important for this process."

Dodds said the Middle Rio Grande is the most vocal. "Taos is ahead of everyone else on their plan, but their district is only one county," she said. "The Southwest Region, of which I'm a member, is mostly rural and is also dealing with the Arizona Water Settlements Act process. I think the common technical platform is the basis to start."

"There lies the rub," McSorley said. "We need a document that every region can sign off on. What everyone agrees on, so we can move forward. We want them to sign off on the core principles. I suggest you take time to do the negotiations now. Taos is one of the few areas outlining all its rights and settlements. I suggest you get everybody on board on where there is consensus into a signed document. If there are disagreements, everyone will know."

"Part of the process is that the state has prepared draft reports," Dixon said. "The regions haven't seen them. They will have the opportunity to comment and take ownership of their own report. I think we will have a clearer idea of how they feel about the assumptions."

Rep. Candy Spence-Ezzell said she appreciated the presentation to the committee. "We have problems all over the state being in compliance. I agree that we should be totally adjudicated. My statement is that one of my jobs on your shoulders is to protect the rights of New Mexico water. Take the role of being proactive. We have to be in compliance, especially on the Pecos side. I'm feeling water quality is about to be a big issue. Why aren't the OSC and OSE working together? I hope you have good communication between the two of you."

"The ISC is a governor-appointed board, isn't it?" Spence-Ezzell asked, to which Dixon answered that it is.

"I think the board needs to be restructured, as well as some other boards," Spence-Ezzell said. "I think the issue needs to be brought to the Legislature with restructuring. I think the general public has a great distrust of anything that has to do with government. Make sure the public knows the meetings are open. It boils down to awareness of what public perception is of an agency. This is not a slam. I want to see things done differently. Sometimes common sense is better than the advice of attorneys."

She said the state needs to look at each region as unique. "We are not out of the drought. We have a lot of years to make up."

Sen. Joseph Cervantes proposed the ISC publish online the draft reports that were submitted at the end of June. "I would like to see the process evolving. I've never read a water plan. I've never looked at them to decide policy. The tools, spending time and money and resources, I tell you we're not using them."

He asked about the Elephant Butte Irrigation District, because he understood it was not involved in the planning process. "They are in litigation and it might change everything. I don't see eye-to-eye with the OSE. This plan seems of dubious need."

Rep. Matthew McQueen asked if the plans address efficiencies and changes. He said he, as a mutual domestic water association board member, has seen meters put in.

Dixon said it was up to the regions to develop their policies. "Conservation is at the forefront. It's their choice what to put in."

"Do you have guidelines on what they should consider?" McQueen asked.

"They are within the handbook, with suggestions for priority," Dixon replied. "We threw out examples. Several regions are establishing task forces, because almost half are doing watershed restoration."

"Rep. Bandy asked about climate change," McQueen said. "I am unable to find a climate change report on your website."

"Part of the common technical platform is evaluation of drought and projections over the next 50 years," Dixon replied. "We have the additional gap of climate change. The platform addresses it, but not exactly. We've been told the regions had been told they could not consider climate change."

Rep. Bealquin "Bill" Gomez questioned the map and why a portion of Sierra County was not in the Lower Rio Grande region. "It should include the part below Caballo."

He said he had met several times with those involved in the regional water planning and they indicated to him they were not too happy with the data the ISC is providing. "The ISC has data that we provide to them monthly on how much water is being used. We think that data needs to be provided to the groups, especially in our district, so people can look at them."

"I don't think the farmers' groups are involved," Gomez continued. "We need to bring them into the process, because they are the biggest users in the area. We need to create plans that are used."

Wirth encouraged committee members to pull up water plans from their own regions. "It's an issue of large and small projects and potentially prioritizing the large projects. There is ongoing debate on the Water Trust Board. They have heard loud and clear that small projects are important."

"You're in a difficult position, not enough money and not enough time," Wirth concluded to Dixon.