The San Juan Water Conservancy District (SJWCD) Board of Directors discussed a water operations study proposal from engineering firm RJH Consultants at its July 20 meeting.
This study will assess the need for a reservoir at Running Iron Ranch by identifying potential water shortages in the area and if the proposed reservoir would be able to address any shortages that may exist, according to the proposal.
The proposal indicates that the proposed study would cost approximately $147,400.
SJWCD board president Randy Cooper opened the discussion by explaining that RJH Project Manager Robert Huzjak was present to answer questions from the board about the study proposal that RJH submitted to the SJWCD on May 22.
Huzjak explained to the board that the ultimate goal of the study would be to determine what reservoir size might be appropriate and how it might serve all constituents in the area, which would include determining what water storage exists today, what the long-term future water needs might be, getting input from stakeholders, and building a model using this information to simulate future water supply and demand and how much storage would be needed over a 50- to 100-year period.
SJWCD board member Rodney Proffitt commented that the length of the planning horizon was not stated in the study proposal, although Huzjak had indicated that it would likely be 50 years.
Huzjak replied that this could be added to the proposal.
Proffitt also asked how many public meetings RJH would plan to hold as part of the planning process.
Huzjak replied that he is unsure how many public meetings would occur and that most meetings would be directly with various stakeholders, like the Town of Pagosa Springs, Archuleta County, the Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD), and others.
SJWCD board member Candace Jones commented that Proffitt was suggesting that one stakeholder would be the public and that there should be public meetings planning to engage them.
Huzjak replied that public engagement is normally not involved in these types of water studies until a plan that the key stakeholders support is finalized, with public outreach coming afterward.
Proffitt and Cooper commented that Huzjak’s proposal made sense and would allow the district and RJH to have concrete numbers that could be discussed by the public when outreach is done.
Jones commented that it would “behoove us” to include planning for public meetings at an appropriate time in the study proposal.
“And if we don’t say something like that, that we’re going to be subject to criticism or somebody’s going to take this and twist it into we’re trying to exclude the public,” Jones said. “And we don’t want to have somebody twist this into excluding the public when the point is it’s really a preliminary, pre-public exercise. So, I think we should contemplate in here that that step comes.”
Cooper stated that he agreed with Jones’ point and asked if Huzjak could include this in the proposal.
Huzjak stated that he could include a public meeting, but that he thought a more focused and planned public outreach campaign about the broader project instead of just discussing one element would be ideal.
SJWCD board member Charles Riehm commented that having public comment on a water demand study when the data is not available and has not been presented to the public would likely “provoke emotional responses without any accurate information.”
Jones reiterated her view that having a public presentation of the results of the study included in the proposal is critical to protect the district from accusations that it is trying to exclude the public.
Riehm highlighted that the SJWCD is contracting RJH to do the study, while the outreach is the board’s responsibility and can be done by the district.
Huzjak commented that having a focused plan for public outreach and public engagement, and when and how to present information, is critical.
He added that this study would complement previous work on the costs of various reservoir sizes and that presenting the package of information about water needs, the size of reservoir necessary to address, and the costs and next steps for building that reservoir would be a more effective package to present to the public than the results of one study.
Jones indicated that Archuleta County is in the process of drafting its comprehensive plan, which would include water needs.
Huzjak commented that this is part of why engaging the county is critical, since it controls many aspects of growth and development in the area, which will drive water needs.
SJWCD board member John Kappelman questioned if recreational stakeholders should be included in the study given the potential that the reservoir could augment instream flows for fish and recreation.
Riehm commented that Trout Unlimited and other recreation groups had been in contact with the district.
Huzjak stated that these groups could give input on what river flows might be needed for their industries and interests, which could be important since the reservoir has potential habitat and recreational benefits.
Cooper commented that reservoir approval at the state and federal levels is highly dependent on demonstrating multiple uses.
He also explained that SJWCD board treasurer Joe Tedder had discussed the costs of the study with Cooper and that it would have to be split between 2026 and 2027 to meet the district’s budget.
However, since Tedder was not present at the meeting, Cooper expressed uncertainty about how to proceed.
Jones commented that the board likely should not move forward with approving the study until discussing the payment details further with Tedder.
She also noted that she is unsure what steps the county plans to take for its comprehensive planning and if it would be willing to use any elements of the RJH study for its comprehensive plan while potentially contributing funds to it.
Riehm commented that he believed that the county has a “hole” in their planning activities around water demand and that a previous discussion with one of the Archuleta County commissioners indicated that they would be interested in working with the SJWCD to use data from its studies to fill that gap.
Cooper commented that the district should assign members to discuss the study and the potential for collaboration with the county.
Following a brief discussion, Cooper and Kappelman volunteered to meet with the county and discuss the proposal.
The board then unanimously voted to approve them representing the SJWCD to the county in this discussion.
Cooper commented to Huzjak that the district would not be approving the proposed study at the meeting, but would meet with the county and aim to make progress on the proposal at its next meeting in August.
Huzjak asked the board if it had spoken with PAWSD and if PAWSD was going to cooperate with the study since, without PAWSD’s data, it would be difficult to move the study forward.
Jones asked PAWSD board member Bill Hudson, who was attending the meeting, if PAWSD’s data would be available to support the study.
“The public data will be,” Hudson said.
In response to a followup question from Riehm, Hudson added that anonymous data about PAWSD water use is public data, but that private individuals’ data would not be available.
Jones commented that there would need to be a “fine point put on that,” but that Hudson was indicating that PAWSD data would be available and that “hopefully” PAWSD would follow through on this and other commitments to the SJWCD.
She added that Huzjak should share with Cooper and Kappelman what data sets would be needed from the county prior to discussing the issue with them.
Huzjak commented that this data would mostly be about historical use and that he would supply the board with further ideas about data sets needed.
Proffitt commented that the district’s jurisdiction extends beyond PAWSD’s boundaries and that the district should also look at Aspen Springs as a possible part of its water management work.
Jones commented that the district should look at its stakeholder list with the issue of neighborhoods that depend on hauling water from PAWSD or other sources in mind.
Cooper closed the discussion by stating that he would get Huzjak an accurate map of the district and its potential water users.
>