Graham Doubles Down on Water Gamesmanship

By Linda Milhaven

As Councilman Barry Graham is pursuing his re-election campaign, it seems that he may be creating a bogie man out of recycled water so he can make promises to save us from it. At the same time, he is boasting that he cut expenses but is not acknowledging the impacts of the cuts and delays in spending. That is political gamesmanship, not prudent public policy.

Yesterday morning Graham sent an email attempting to correct “misinformation” about water. He tells only part of the story.

PROJECTS TAKEN OUT OF THE BUDGET

Graham talks about what’s in the water budget but doesn’t explain why projects were taken out of the budget. You can find the list of the removed projects attached below.

 

COLORADO RIVER ALLOCATION CUTS

Graham claims there are “no cuts to residents’ water supply in the proposed . . . budget”. I am not sure what he means by this. Is the city not planning for cuts?

 

The Colorado River management rules expire this year, 2026. Arizona proposes that our share be cut by 28% but Colorado and other northern states want us to take a bigger cut. Negotiations continue.

 

Whatever the cuts will be, it will be significant for us since Scottsdale gets 70% of our water from the Colorado River.

 

The city has planned for this eventuality for decades and the Water Strategic Plan has several solutions to fill the gap. Even Graham acknowledges that there is no one solution and we need to pursue all options. That is why it is confusing that important projects are being removed or delayed.

 

PURE WATER

Advanced Purified Recycled Water (also known as Pure Water) is the largest project taken from the plan, $67.7M. It presents the greatest and most immediate opportunity to replace the cuts. It builds on our existing recycling capacity, can deliver water sooner than other projects, provides a renewable source, and is cost efficient.

Scottsdale has been recharging recycled ultra-purified water into the drinking water aquifer for more than 30 years. We have the most sophisticated recycled water facilities in the world and deliver water quality that exceeds the quality of bottled water. Other cities recognize the value of this additional water source and are actively pursuing Pure Water as a long-term water source.

During high demand periods, we take the water out of the aquifer, treat it and mix in our drinking water. Scottsdale is not sending the highly purified water directly into the drinking water today but continues to work with the State to finalize next steps. Additional investments will be needed to meet the State’s new safety standards.

 

We should be moving forward today with engineering design to make the necessary improvements but there is no money in the budget to move forward with this work this year or next.

 

You can learn more about recycled water on the city’s website through a link at the bottom of this email.

 

GRAHAM’S POLICY POSITION ON WATER

Graham has gone on record expressing concerns with Pure Water. He uses alliterative, derogatory slang to refer to Pure Water, undermining public confidence in this option.

 

Last Tuesday, he suggested we should wait and see what other cities do. To a resident group, late last year, he said it should be the last option we pursue.

 

Graham makes statements about our water security and recycled water that are either false or misleading. He either doesn’t understand or fails to acknowledge that:

All water is recycled.

Groundwater in the aquifer includes recycled wastewater.

Groundwater in the aquifer is finite and not renewable.

Pump capacity is inadequate to meet future demands to pull the water out of the ground sufficient to make up for the cuts. (Four Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Wells approved several years ago are still not operational. Why?)

Colorado River water includes sewage dumped by upstream communities that we treat and put directly into our drinking water today

Cuts in our Colorado River water allocation will far exceed any surplus that we have today.

Scottsdale water meets or exceeds all safety standards.

Budgets reflect policy and the proposed budget redefines our water policy. Last Tuesday, Graham said “this is a budget conversation, this is not a policy conversation”. It is both.

 

IN SUMMARY

Slow walking water projects is a policy decision. Since cuts to our Colorado River allocation are imminent and since proposed projects will take years to deliver water from new sources, we must move forward without delay.

 

We are ahead of the game with recycled water; we should not be waiting for others to catch up.

 

Councilman Graham, you end your email saying “we can’t take our water security for granted. It’s crucial that we all remain vigilant about our future water supply.” I agree AND actions speak louder than words.

 

Restore the water capital investments to the budget, ensure that rate increases are adequate to cover cost increases and long-term capital needs and move forward, without delay, to approve the engineering design for Pure Water.