Regional 'Color Water' district pitched as tool to consolidate irrigation rights and protect basalts

JR Cook, director of the Northeast Oregon Water Association, told the Morrow County Board of Commissioners that a proposed regional district known as “Color Water” would let private irrigation water rights be managed collectively to relieve pressure on local basalt aquifers.

“This brings the entire ag community together under one public entity that can work with you on whatever issues come up,” Cook said, describing a structure that would allow water to be moved within a district boundary and managed for both irrigation and environmental objectives.

Cook said the districts would own and operate conveyance and pump infrastructure and could form an intergovernmental agreement called the Mid Columbia Water Commission to administer regionwide operations. He said the district model would not increase the total rate or volume of water taken from the Columbia River by individual rights holders: “As long as we stay within the rate and volume of those, then there's no enlargement,” he said, referencing mitigation criteria in state rules.

Why it matters: Presenters and commissioners framed the proposal as a response to long‑standing groundwater declines in the region and as a way to coordinate recharge projects, permanent mitigation and cold‑water refugia for fish. Cook said the region has invested in hundreds of millions of dollars of infrastructure since 2012 and argued the district model is the remaining structural step to lock in those gains.

Details and process: Cook said technical audits of individual water rights are underway to verify what the district would administer; he estimated about 90% participation among current project participants and said remaining landowners are being contacted. Cook also said federal permitting remains necessary for in‑river construction such as fish screens and that the mitigation program may require broader multi‑party consultation with tribes and federal agencies.

Cook acknowledged earlier agency concerns raised during the 2026 short legislative session and said supporters voluntarily pulled the bill to address questions with the governor’s office and agencies; he said the sponsors plan to reintroduce the measure in a future session if needed. “We voluntarily pulled the bill for 2026,” he said, adding that staff and co‑chairs have since conducted outreach and produced a written response to opposition comments filed in the legislative system.

Opposition narratives and the response: Cook addressed rumors that the district would be used to supply industrial users such as data centers. “There are a lot of rumors out there…that this is a wolf in sheep's clothing to get water to data centers,” he said, and responded that the water‑rights program itself is for irrigation and that municipal or industrial water rights would remain separate contractual conveyance arrangements.

Next steps: If the Legislature approves enabling language, Cook said landowners would then petition to join the district through a process similar to municipal annexation, and construction and monitoring work would continue. He left written materials and a response table of agency comments with the county for staff review.