Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Secondary Metering Reporting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board presses Cache High Line on missing water-use reporting and considers conditioning state funds
Summary
Board members and staff debated whether to make state funding conditional on Cache High Line Water Association reporting secondary-water deliveries to the Division of Water Rights after staff said the association has not submitted required reports despite tracking deliveries.
A central debate at the Board of Water Resources’ Oct. 15 briefing focused on whether state funding should be conditioned on secondary-water suppliers reporting use to the Division of Water Rights.
Brad Caldwell presented the Cache High Line project. During questions, staff and analytics lead Rachel Shelton told the board the association tracks deliveries to roughly 150 wholesale customers but has not reported that data to the Division of Water Rights. Rachel Shelton told the board she had attended a Cache High Line board meeting and that, "I believe our estimates are not accurate. They are estimates. They're good, but they're wrong," stressing the benefit of receiving actual reported data.
Board members expressed frustration that an entity seeking state funding was not current on reporting. Board member Dana Van Horn warned she was "not inclined to vote for this today" if required reporting remained outstanding, saying she was uncomfortable obligating taxpayer funds to an entity that had not provided data it already possessed.
Legal and program staff outlined two related requirements: a statutorily required metering-plan submission (deadline noted as 12/31/2025) and an annual reporting obligation (by March 31 each year) for metered secondary systems (citing Division of Water Rights processes). Staff recommended avoiding a separate, parallel data collection and instead using a committal checkbox or condition that applicants demonstrate compliance with the state engineer’s reporting requests. Several board members proposed conditioning committal on documented evidence that the applicant has provided required reporting to the Division of Water Rights, or requiring that staff verify reporting before committal.
No final change to the motion was adopted at the briefing; staff will include reporting compliance language and required documentation in committal materials for the board to consider at the action meeting. The board discussed options including (a) require data be submitted before committal, (b) make future guideline changes to require reporting for funded entities, or (c) accept a representation/checklist from applicants attesting they have complied with the state engineer’s requests.
