Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board schedules June work session after extensive discussion of regional water system and well‑election options
Summary
After a multi‑hour presentation by project partners and technical staff about the Pawaka Basin regional water system, construction impacts and options for water‑right elections, the board voted to convene a focused June meeting to negotiate next steps on connecting to the regional system and deciding which local water rights to retain or relinquish.
District officials, Bureau of Reclamation representatives, county project staff and outside contractors briefed the board on the Pawaka Basin Regional Water System project, traffic and construction impacts near the high school (NM‑502), parade and graduation coordination, and the key policy choice the board faces: which well rights, if any, to relinquish as the district considers connecting to the regional system.
Project representatives described three election options presented to the district (continue some well uses with reductions; enter agreement to continue uses; or elect to disconnect and connect to the CWU regional system when available). Board members and staff raised concerns about: the number of wells that would be affected, preserving surface water rights, the timing of design and funding windows, costs of buying treated water versus treating well water (including possible future system purchases), and water‑quality postings (uranium MCL notices) that the environmental department requires the district to post. Jeffrey, the district’s facilities/water technical contact, explained that some wells are currently grouped under an umbrella diversion and that certain wells may be subject to the election while others are not.
Several trustees urged caution and requested more precise information from the state engineer and project technical leads before committing to a specific option. One board member said the board should not rush a vote and recommended a special work session so the community, the state engineer and legal/technical representatives can be present. Another trustee argued for initiating the election process (identifying one or two wells to relinquish per campus) to avoid missing potential construction‑funding windows. After discussion, a board member moved and the board voted to ask Superintendent Segura to organize a focused June meeting to continue the conversation; the motion carried.
