Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Supply topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Candidates spar over Prescott Valley water outlook and solutions
Summary
In a Prescott Valley candidate forum, contenders disagreed over whether the town faces a water crisis and how to address it — candidates cited safe‑yield deadlines, aquifer recharge, regional coalitions and trade‑offs between growth and infrastructure funding.
A lively candidate forum in Prescott Valley on the evening opened with seven timed questions and turned quickly to water, where candidates diverged on whether the town faces an immediate crisis and how to respond.
Mister Thoren, a forum candidate, said Prescott Valley is headed ‘‘into a very serious problem’’ and answered ‘‘yes’’ when asked whether the town has a water crisis, arguing that the town is using more water than it returns to the aquifer, citing a per‑person use figure he described as ‘‘96 gallons’’ and warning that continuing large residential build‑outs would increase demand. He criticized a three‑year safe‑yield plan as unfulfilled and questioned multi‑decade projects such as a pipeline from Chino Valley, saying the price estimates have jumped from figures he gave as $60–$80 million up to $360 million while producing little progress.
Mayor Palguda acknowledged pressure on groundwater — saying Prescott Valley ‘‘is drawing more water out of the ground than we were putting back in’’ — but stressed local conservation steps and programs the town has implemented. The mayor said water use in Prescott Valley is ‘‘about 96 gallons per person per day,’’ described current daily usage as roughly ‘‘5,000,000 gallons’’ and said the town is pursuing aggressive water policy, pilot programs and education while pursuing infrastructure and regional cooperation.
Other candidates framed the problem as regional. Mister Bridal and Mister Abels urged coalitions of municipalities in the Prescott area to coordinate aquifer management and to press state and federal partners for assistance. Council member Greer described water as an Arizona‑wide challenge and said Prescott Valley has been reducing per‑person use; she pointed to local conservation steps such as capturing rooftop runoff and filtration trucks that return hydrant water to the system.
On solutions, candidates offered different emphases: region‑wide planning and coalition building; better monitoring and recharge policy implementation; conserving budgets to prepare for expensive fixes; and limiting large residential expansions until infrastructure and water supplies are proven. Several candidates urged greater public education and pilot recharge programs; no candidate claimed a single immediate technical fix.
The forum highlighted points of contention that would shape any future local water policy debate: whether current usage constitutes a crisis requiring immediate moratoria on large developments, how quickly the town should pursue major inter‑community infrastructure projects, and which financing mechanisms should pay for future water reliability investments.
The forum concluded without any formal action; candidates continued to return to water later in the event while discussing related topics such as annexation and development.
