Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Water Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate advances Bear River development cleanup bill after extended debate over dam sites and interconnect options

Utah State Senate · January 24, 2002
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Senators advanced SB 92 to remove two named Bear River dam sites from statute, add an alternate Washakie site and an interconnect to Willard Bay, and clarify the state's water-development posture; debate centered on local impacts, whether removal precludes future development, and long timelines.

Senate Bill 92, sponsored on the floor by Senator Wadhams, would remove two named Bear River dam sites (Honeyville and Baron's site) from statute as possible development locations and add the Washakie site and an interconnect to Willard/Willard Bay as an alternative. "This senate bill is brought to us in response to an article...members of the communities up there...have expressed support to me that then if we're really not considering them, why are we having them in statute," the sponsor said, framing the measure as code clean-up reflecting current planning priorities.

Supporters and opponents debated the practical import of the change. Senator Knudson said the amendments—and adding Washakie and the interconnect—made the bill "better" and reduced regional tension, while Senator Valentine pressed whether removing Honeyville and Baron's sites would make the Bear River "untouchable" (the sponsor replied, "Definitely not. There's a couple of dam sites that are still listed"). Senator Butters cautioned that selection of any site typically generates strong local opposition and observed the long timelines for water development: "It'll be 20 years before we get a drop of water anywhere."

Discussion touched on technical alternatives such as increasing capacity at the Hiram Dam and the importance of the interconnect to transport water to the Salt Lake Valley. Proponents said the change reassures communities that sites not currently under active consideration will be removed from statute while leaving other development options intact. After debate the Senate advanced the bill to the third reading calendar; the roll call recorded 26 aye votes, no nays, with 3 senators absent.