Utah committee presses Colorado River Authority on long-term funding and program delivery for demand-management pilot

Representative Scott Chiobbe opened a Natural Resources Interim Committee session that turned to the Colorado River Authority’s demand-management pilot and how it should be funded and managed going forward. The committee reviewed staff recommendations on payment sources, program safeguards and a proposal to consolidate the Authority into the Department of Natural Resources.

The discussion matters because the pilot program uses temporary, voluntary conservation by water-rights holders to reduce depletions and help Utah meet its obligations under the 1922 Colorado River Compact. The Authority received a one-time state appropriation of $5,000,000; about $4,000,000 has already been obligated and roughly $950,000 remains for the 2026 irrigation season. Committee members pressed for options that do not saddle general fund taxpayers with ongoing costs.

Lacey, staff for the committee, summarized the recommendations and said the Authority should “work with public water suppliers to come up with a way to fund this program on an ongoing basis,” and that any long-term funding should avoid placing the entire burden on the state general fund. The draft recommendations also call for measures to make the pilot more robust — including assurances that conserved water actually is delivered downstream and additional surface-management protections for enrolled parcels — and for consolidating the Colorado River Authority into DNR (a change that would require statute language and a bill file).

Amy Haas, executive director of the Colorado River Authority, described the Authority’s role and urged caution about losing nimbleness. “We are a compact defense entity,” Haas said. “We are safeguarding Utah’s legal obligations and entitlements under the compacts.” She told the committee the Authority was created to be nimble, move quickly on procurement and contracting, and defend Utah’s interests in multistate and federal negotiations.

Mark Stilson, the Authority’s principal engineer, explained how the pilot compensates participants: payments are made for “saved depletion,” the portion of diverted water the crop or activity would have consumed, while the Authority requires delivery of the entire diversion into the program. Stilson said compensation for 2025 was set at $390 per acre-foot of saved depletion and that the pilot was authorized only for 2025–2026. He also described delivery and change-application issues, noting the value of approved change applications through the state engineer and the Division of Water Rights as a prerequisite for participation and as a mechanism that “allows protections … to be shepherded downstream.”

Committee members asked how compensation is measured; Stilson said the program uses OpenET satellite evapotranspiration estimates and the pilot’s payment methodology was developed from federal System Conservation Pilot Program models but adjusted for Utah conditions. Representative Shipp asked how far in advance applicants must commit; the Authority said the 2025 application window opened Sept. 2 and closed Oct. 10, with final enrollment information by Nov. 1.

Senator Musselman and others noted the Lower Basin has received substantial federal funding for voluntary conservation under past federal programs and emergency NEPA actions, and asked whether the Upper Basin can expect comparable federal support. Haas and Stilson said much of the recent direct federal funding has gone to Lower Basin actions tied to large volumes of conservation and special federal processes; they urged pursuing multiple funding sources while acknowledging the state bears the legal compact obligation. “That legal obligation belongs to the state of Utah,” Haas said.

On the Authority’s budget structure, staff recommended consolidating the Colorado River Authority with DNR — a statutory change requiring a bill — to place it among other water-management agencies. Several legislators, including Senator Winterton and Representative Albrecht, objected to consolidation, saying the Authority’s independence and procurement flexibility are important for fast-moving interstate negotiations. Senator Winterton said the Authority’s independent posture made Utah “a leader” in negotiating with lower-basin states and federal partners and urged caution about moving the entity under DNR.

No committee vote was taken; staff said the draft recommendations will be revised based on member feedback before the committee’s October interim meeting and that members will have two months to further refine recommendations before any formal votes.

Staff and agency next steps include refining the funding recommendation so the beneficiaries share costs, developing methods to verify downstream delivery and surface management of enrolled parcels, and returning to the committee with more detailed proposals. The Authority said it would present ideas for program improvements and funding options at a later date.