Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Storage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pueblo West weighs joining Roy authority to expand storage; district is 4.76% member in proposed authority
Summary
Board members discussed a draft agreement to form a Restoration of Yield (Roy) authority with other regional water providers; Pueblo West would be a 4.76% member, responsible for administrative costs and with an estimated 207 acre-feet of storage tied to the site.
Get email alerts on the Water Storage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Pueblo West board spent extensive time April 28 discussing a multi-jurisdictional plan to form an authority for water storage known as the Restoration of Yield (Roy) group. Staff presented a draft agreement to establish an authority modeled on a reservoir or ditch-and-canal company; the authority would be able to carry out capital storage projects and administrative functions on behalf of member entities.
Why it matters: the authority could provide additional storage capacity the district can use in drought years and to maximize water trades; storage increases give members more control over when and where water is held. Board members said having a “seat at the table” is valuable for long-term water portfolio management.
District staff reported the district’s membership share in the Roy group is 4.76 percent. Historical figures presented at the meeting included a 2019 opinion-of-probable-cost for a proposed reservoir at about $52.8 million; at that cost Pueblo West’s capital share would have been approximately $2.6 million. Staff noted the authority‑establishment agreement itself does not obligate members to fund capital projects; it is intended to fund administration and governance. Parties may opt out of individual projects while remaining members of the authority.
Staff also provided project specifics for the Haines Creek (Roy) reservoir site: the draft project would yield approximately 207 acre-feet of storage for Pueblo West’s share; staff previously contributed roughly $140,000 toward a site purchase. Board members asked about the timing and magnitude of potential administrative fees and capital assessments; staff said administrative costs are expected to be small and long-term, while capital costs would be project-dependent and are likely a half-decade or more away.
Several board members stressed that participation preserves the district’s influence on regional projects. The draft authority agreement provides equal voting rights among members and sets a four-of-six majority for decisions, meaning several smaller members can outvote larger ones on certain actions. Staff recommended continuing with the draft agreement so Pueblo West has a continued role in planning and future storage initiatives.
Ending: Board members asked staff to continue negotiating the authority documents and to include cost‑planning for future budget discussions. No formal vote to join authority capital projects occurred at the meeting; the discussion centered on governance, expected storage yield and financial planning.
