By Jared Jacang Maher, FACE THE STATE

Denver Water officials were conspicuously vague last week when discussing their plans for a 2011 rate hike of 10.4 percent. It turns out that the proposed increase, if approved, will be the first in a series undertaken by the state’s largest water utility. At the request of Face the State, officials provided a financial document showing that Denver Water seeks to raise about $72 million in additional revenue by increasing rates approximately 35 percent by 2013.

That’s a tall glass to fill for the 1.3 million Metro Denver water customers who’ve been subject to rate increases every year since 2000.

The fact that the proposed rate increase for 2011 alone will add an estimated $41 to the average water bill in Denver had City Council members griping. But multiply that dollar amount by three and the Denver Water Commission could have a lot of angry residents at their next board meeting on Nov 17.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

By Jared Jacang Maher, FACE THE STATE

Water rates for Denver residents could be increasing in a big way.

In a contentious meeting with Denver City Council this afternoon, officials from the independent water authority revealed that the Denver Water Board is considering rate increases of 14 percent for residential users. The rate hikes could be adopted as soon as next month.

Denver Water provides service to cities throughout the metro area. Jim Lochhead, who replaced the late Chips Berry as CEO, said the rate increase is necessary to cover multiple capital improvement projects, including a significant update to Cheesman Reservoir.

Members of council were not pleased.

“I don’t think Denver Water has our best interest in mind,” said councilman Paul Lopez, who criticized the water district for failing to seek public input and being insensitive to ratepayers during a down economy. Councilwoman Jeanne Faatz relayed what she said is a common complaint from her constituents: “They keep asking us to cut back on water use and then keep charging us more.” The budget for the utility is projected to increase $19 million next year to fund operating expenses and capital improvement on Denver Water’s system. Under the proposal, the average consumer in Denver will pay $41 more in 2011, according Angela Bricmont, the Director of Finance.

Still, council members only got part of the story. Asked after the meeting if 2011 was the only year ratepayers should expect an increase, Lochhead replied he “would anticipate that rates will continually go up,” noting that Denver Water was seeking to ensure “long term sustainability and reliability of the system.” Under their current plan the utility hopes to “smooth” rate hikes over three years.

Denver Water already sold $90 million in construction bonds at a historically low 3.1% interest rate last week. Lochhead indicated that he expects the utility will issue additional bonds in the coming years, though he did not provide a specific dollar amount.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

Two Fort Collins legislators have petitioned the state to strengthen proposed rules governing in situ leach uranium mining — the method Powertech Uranium Corp. plans to use at the Centennial Project northeast of the city —to prevent groundwater contamination, the Coloradoan reports.

In situ leaching is a method of uranium extraction that dissolves uranium ore with a fluid and pumps the solution out of the ground to be processed.

State Rep. Randy Fischer wrote a letter also signed by Rep. John Kefalas and Rep. Liane “Buffie” McFadyen urging state mining officials to ensure mining companies can’t slip through a loophole in new rules being written to govern in situ uranium min-ing statewide.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

Gov. Bill Ritter has signed Senate Bill 52, which makes it clear that a final permit for ground water wells in a designated ground water basin is final, The Fort Morgan Times reports.

Under the bill, the Ground Water Commission, which manages the eight designated basins along the Eastern plains and the Front Range, could revise a basin’s boundaries to remove previously-included areas only if the area does not include wells for which final permits have been issued.

The bill includes an exception for current legal cases winding through the courts, a nod to the 2006 Gallegos v. Colorado Ground Water Commission case where the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that a surface water rights holder who has senior water rights can challenge the permit of a ground water well in a designated basin if the senior water rights holder can prove their surface water rights are being affected.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

Rafters and anglers are squaring off over rights to prized Colorado waterways, The Wall Street Journal reports.

The debate has spilled into the state legislature and inspired at least 24 citizen-sponsored ballot initiatives. The core question: Do paddlers have an absolute right to float down any river in the state, even rivers that run through private property reserved for fly-fishing?

Steve Roberts says no.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

The state and water users need to get the Environmental Protection Agency on board sooner in the planning process of providing water for future generations, a member of Gov. Bill Ritter’s Cabinet said Wednesday, according to the Greeley Tribune.

Jim Martin, executive director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, was the luncheon speaker for the 2010 Spring Water Users meeting of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District at the Radisson Conference Center.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

By Debi Brazzale, COLORADO NEWS AGENCY

With debate over next year’s budget soon to unfold, two southeastern Colorado lawmakers say they are prepared to dig in their heels if more money is taken away from water projects affecting their region.

Early indications are that the funding will be left largely in tact in the coming budget year after having been diverted last year to help cover the state’s budget deficit. Neverthess, Rep. Wes Mckinley, a Democrat from Walsh, and Republican Sen. Ken Kester, of Las Animas, say they are on guard and that the Colorado Water Conservation Board’s funds need to be protected to keep water projects going in their districts.

Of special concern is the Arkansas Conduit Project, which took a temporary hit last year when more than $100 million was diverted from the water conservation board to help the state through its fiscal straits and balance the state budget. Some $35 million of that total came out of the conduit project’s funding, putting federal matching dollars at risk as well. The project provides treated water to southeastern Colorado.

That money since has been recouped through higher-than-anticipated revenue from the state’s severance tax, according to Colorado Water Conservation Board Direction Jennifer Gimbel. Gimbel also said that, so far, next’s year’s pending budget takes $11 million from the board’s funds but that the diversion won’t affect the conduit or any other current projects.

McKinley acknowledged the budget process is far from over.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if they did take some more,” said McKinley. “It seems like if there’s money out there, there’s several hands grabbing for it.”

Recommendations from the staff of the legislative Joint Budget Committee, which drafts the state’s budget,  indicate there won’t be any diversions imperiling the water projects in the coming year. If so, Mckinley said, he might try to get the budget amended to include even more funding.

Kester echoed McKinleys assessment.

“We have to have that money … and we can’t just take it down to nothing and continue to operate the water programs,” Kester said.

Mckinley said he is not just concerned about the water fund but also about the state’s Branding Board cash fund, which has about $500,000 in savings that he says the Department of Agriculture would like to have. McKinley said that he was successful in keeping the fund in tact last year despite attempts by the department to tap into that money.

“It’s a savings fund, a users fund. The Brand Board has managed to save up a pretty good chunk of money, and there’s people trying to get it,” said McKinley.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

A battle pitting river rafters against private landowners could shift from lawmakers to voters after both sides Friday filed a record 24 proposed ballot initiatives on the subject before Friday’s deadline for trying to get issues on the November ballot, The Denver Post reports. Rafters believe they should be allowed to use the rivers they have floated on for decades and are upset that the Senate turned a bill on the issue into a study. Robert Hamel and Jay R.K. Kenney filed four measures on behalf of rafters. Landowners believe they should be able to protect their property rights. John Leede and Charles Thrailkill, members of the Creekside Coalition, filed 20 measures, limiting the use of rivers or targeting rafters with strict liability provisions.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

Editor’s Note: HB10-1188 was most recently debated in the Colorado Senate on March 22. State Bill premium users may listen to the floor session by pressing on the audio player published here:

Rafting and fishing supporters are floating last-minute compromises in hopes of avoiding a fight over a bill that was originally intended to protect rafters’ rights to continue using Colorado rivers, the Associated Press reports. Rep. Kathleen Curry, a registered independent from Gunnison, said Friday that groups from both camps are threatening to take the issue to the ballot box in November. Curry said she hopes to force the Senate to back down on an amendment to the bill that would delay it for a year to study its impact. She said lawmakers should deal with the real issues: whether rafters should be allowed to use the rivers they have floated for decades, or whether landowners should be able to bar them to protect their property rights.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

A coalition of municipal water suppliers from the south Denver Metro area and Wyoming announced Thursday at the Capitol that they’re banding together to study a project that could end up competing with the Fort Collins entrepreneur’s proposed Regional Watershed Supply project and potentially call for new reservoirs to be built in Larimer County somewhere east of the foothills, The Coloradoan reports.

Each utility in the coalition will contribute $20,000 to a feasibility study for a massive municipal water pipeline project called the Colorado-Wyoming Cooperative Water Supply Project, which would pipe water for 532,000 people from Wyoming’s Flaming Gorge Reservoir to the Front Range.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >