Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bear River Water Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate debates Bear River water bill as members press amendments and environmental safeguards
Summary
Senate committee reported SB98 (Bear River Water Development and Allocation) out favorably as amended; debate focused on proposed reservoir sites, county allocations (Cache 60,000 af, Box Elder 60,000 af, Salt Lake 50,000 af, Davis/Weber 50,000 af), a $4 million supplemental fund, and environmental and groundwater concerns; no final Senate passage recorded.
Senate Bill 98, a comprehensive proposal for Bear River water development and allocation, drew extended floor debate Wednesday after being reported out of the Energy, Natural Resources and Agriculture Committee.
Senator Fred W. Finlayson, speaking for the committee and the Bear River Task Force, described the bill as a mechanism to allocate developed Bear River water among counties and to allow state sponsorship of projects. He listed possible reservoir sites including Honeyville, a Barrens site, Avon, Mill Creek and Oneida Narrows, and summarized the committee's allocation plan: "We've allocated to Cache County 60 Thousand acre feet of water up to that amount, Box Elder County, 60 Thousand acre feet, Salt Lake County's portion is 50,000, and the amount share between, Davis and Weber is 50,000."
The committee amended financing provisions to direct a $4,000,000 supplemental—discussed as a mix of general-fund and thrift-account dollars—into a Bear River Development Fund to support initial steps and additional environmental assessments. Finlayson emphasized safeguards in the bill: projects would not begin until required permits were obtained and until at least 70 percent of the water was contracted or pre-sold.
Several senators raised concerns. One urged adding language to include Hiram Dam as an authorized site and deleting the Barrens site because of environmental sensitivity; others warned of the expense and litigation risk of large dam projects and urged permitting flexibility that would allow conservancy districts or private entities to develop projects rather than requiring state sponsorship. Lawmakers also debated the bill’s treatment of groundwater versus surface water; Finlayson said the bill addresses surface water only and that groundwater responses would depend on state engineer determinations and exchange mechanisms.
Why it matters: SB98 lays out a statewide mechanism for developing Bear River resources—a major potential water source for northern Utah—and defines how costs and allocations would be apportioned among counties and users, with significant environmental and fiscal repercussions.
What’s next: Debate continued on the floor and senators asked for more time; Carrie Peterson moved that the item continue the following morning. No final passage of SB98 was recorded in this session’s transcript.
