without our buy-in their proposals all fail

..And like usual, WE, that’s you & me, (public) were not given a legitimate seat in any of these discussion … yet without our buy-in their proposals all fail…

Arizona makes no legislative progress on water issues despite governor’s push

·       By Tony Davis Arizona Daily Star

·       Jun 2, 2018 Updated Jun 4, 2018Top of Form

What was heralded to be a big legislative session on water issues turned out to be much ado about nothing.

For much of last year, groups appointed by Gov. Doug Ducey mulled behind closed doors over a raft of proposals aimed at halting declines at Lake Mead, improving groundwater management and clamping down on operators of the $4 billion Central Arizona Project.

The governor’s staff told reporters back then that the state needed an overhaul of water laws on the scale of the 1980 Groundwater Management Act, the toughest of its kind.

To ensure enough water exists for growth, Arizona must “get its act together” on water, Ducey’s staff said.

Instead, the Legislature did:

  • Nothing for Lake Mead. No legislation was even introduced along the lines of what the governor’s Arizona Department of Water Resources wanted to boost protection of Lake Mead, which supplies drinking water to Tucson and Phoenix via the CAP.
  • Nothing to crack down on CAP. No bill was introduced like ADWR wanted to curb CAP officials’ ability to negotiate out-of-state water deals and declare sovereign immunity from lawsuits.
  • Nothing for water metering. Before the Legislature even met, in the face of intense rural opposition, ADWR dropped a proposal to require metering of wells owned by farmers and other rural residents — now required in Tucson and Phoenix.
  • Nothing for desalination. A proposal for a desalination action plan, to identify areas where brackish groundwater could be treated, and the costs of treating the water, went nowhere.
  • Nothing to stop out-of-state water transfers. A bill requiring legislative approval to transport water out of state also failed.
  • Nothing for Sierra Vista. The Legislature didn’t pass a bill favored by development interests and the city of Sierra Vista to loosen requirements for new subdivisions in rural counties to demonstrate an adequate, 100-year water supply.

Lawmakers did pay tribute to the past, however. A non-binding resolution succeeded, one ticking off past water achievements. They include the 1980 groundwater law and 1986 and 1996 laws allowing underground water storage and creating the Arizona Water Banking Authority to recharge Colorado River water underground. The resolution pledged to continue “leadership and support for appropriate water management practices and policies that protect property and water rights.”

CLASH OF INTEREST GROUPS

Blame the inaction on a lack of consensus among interest groups, said Rep. Russell Bowers, the House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee chairman.

“How we do water policy in Arizona is very slowly and very comprehensively,” Bowers, a Mesa Republican, said last week. “There are so many interconnected parts of the water system … and consensus has to be the main part.”

Sen. Gail Griffin, author of several of the unsuccessful measures, said they were “just not ready this year,” and that legislators will try again next year.

The non-binding resolution was “a very important piece of legislation,” she said. It noted that Arizona uses less water today than in the 1950s, despite a nearly 500 percent population boost since then, she said.

Already, “Arizona is so far ahead of California and other states in water conservation and planning for people of this beautiful state,” said Griffin, a Hereford Republican who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

But if consensus means unanimous support, we are doomed, because that will never happen, said Kathy Ferris, a former Arizona Department of Water Resources director. She helped shepherd the 1980 act into existence as chair of a groundwater study commission. She now acts as a private water watchdog.

“The legislative session was a complete failure where water is concerned. We should be embarrassed,” Ferris said. “We are experiencing a two-decade-old drought. Lake Mead water levels are declining and we have lost the respect of our sister Colorado River Basin states for failing to take action to protect Lake Mead.

“In rural areas of the state, finite groundwater supplies are threatened by new wells and unlimited pumping. Every year that goes by without action means we are further in the hole, and failing to take action is a grave failure of leadership.”

Ducey’s office didn’t respond to questions from the Star about the lack of success on his water goals.

Sierra Club lobbyist Sandy Bahr, whose group took no position on the legislation other than to oppose loosening water adequacy requirements, said Ducey made a major mistake by freezing the public out of the task forces and other groups he appointed last year to fashion a water legislative agenda.

“It was like pulling teeth to get information on what was going on at those meetings,” she said.

“Anytime you don’t let people in the room, they assume you’re up to no good,” said Bahr, director of the Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon chapter.

“We need sunshine in our public processes. He didn’t have many allies, and that makes a big difference when you get to the Legislature.”

DUCEY’S WISH LIST

The centerpiece of the governor’s wish list was a measure to let the Arizona Department of Water Resources set up a program allowing cities, tribes and other water users to leave water in Lake Mead for which they had contracts through the CAP.

Currently, that authority rests solely with the agency that operates the CAP, the three-county Central Arizona Water Conservation District. ADWR officials said more water needs to be left in Mead to keep the lake from falling to dangerously low levels.

That and other measures got caught in the crossfire of the yearlong conflict between the two water agencies over power and policy. CAP took no formal position on any water legislation. But its officials sharply criticized the state proposal during public hearings. They said it would infringe on CAP’s contract rights, that they had approved such conservation measures in the past without incident, and that taking less water would raise customers’ rates.

Ferris said these measures fell to pressure from “special interests.” She wouldn’t name them, but farming, ranching and development interest groups have supported most of CAP’s stances on water issues.

She also said the CAP outgunned the ADWR because it has a much larger staff and budget and more lobbyists.

Bowers, however, said there was a lot of suspicion among some interest groups about what a state water-saving program would mean “in the hands of a governor or agency that is the king.”

Some groups were concerned that this program wouldn’t be voluntary, he said. Asked if he thought the fears were well-founded, he replied, “It doesn’t really matter when you’re afraid.”

Griffin said she’s not sure what Ferris means by special interests, adding that the public needs to vet water legislation and that the public isn’t a special interest.

Bowers called Ferris, who has worked for a Phoenix municipal water users group, “the biggest special interest in the room.”

“When you represent municipal utilities, you think that everyone else is a special interest,” he said.

Ferris is a legal counsel for the Arizona Municipal Water Utilities Association, but on these issues, she is speaking only for herself, she said. The association’s attempts to “ensure that cities can provide safe, sustainable water supplies” is a public interest, she said.

WHAT’S NEXT?

Now, Griffin and Bowers, whose committees held hearings on water across the state during the legislative session, will hold more this summer, including an as-yet-unscheduled one in Tucson. There will be meetings in June in Kingman, the Verde River Valley and Buckeye.

For the governor, water remains a priority, and his office will continue to work closely with the ADWR and other interests to secure the state’s water future, Ducey’s press secretary, Elizabeth Berry, said in an email Friday.

Since some of his proposals don’t need legislative approval, Ducey will exercise his executive authority “to continue Arizona’s strength as a leader in water management,” Berry said.

For the Sierra Club’s Bahr, the best approach would be to include conservationists, who were largely left out of the governor’s efforts, and to look at broader issues.

“We ought to be talking about some of our other rivers, and not just feeding the growth machine,” Bahr said. “Yes, we need to have an agreement on dealing with drought, which is quickly becoming our normal. But it shouldn’t be just about, ‘How can we leave more water in Lake Mead.’”

Bowers said he believes the push toward stronger water legislation will ultimately bear fruit. Right now, the biggest thing needed in legislation is a broad agreement to save water for Lake Mead so Arizona can pass a formal drought plan for the Colorado River, he said.

“That’s our hope, that we can do it and respect contracted rights for users,” he said. “If we do that, and everybody cuts back a little bit and feels a pinch, we can get something through.”

And like usual, WE, that’s you & me, (public) were not given a legitimate seat in any of these discussion … yet without our buy-in their proposals all fail

..And like usual, WE, that’s you & me, (public) were not given a legitimate seat in any of these discussion … yet without our buy-in their proposals all fail…

Arizona makes no legislative progress on water issues despite governor’s push

·       By Tony Davis Arizona Daily Star

·       Jun 2, 2018 Updated Jun 4, 2018Top of Form

What was heralded to be a big legislative session on water issues turned out to be much ado about nothing.

For much of last year, groups appointed by Gov. Doug Ducey mulled behind closed doors over a raft of proposals aimed at halting declines at Lake Mead, improving groundwater management and clamping down on operators of the $4 billion Central Arizona Project.

The governor’s staff told reporters back then that the state needed an overhaul of water laws on the scale of the 1980 Groundwater Management Act, the toughest of its kind.

To ensure enough water exists for growth, Arizona must “get its act together” on water, Ducey’s staff said.

Instead, the Legislature did:

  • Nothing for Lake Mead. No legislation was even introduced along the lines of what the governor’s Arizona Department of Water Resources wanted to boost protection of Lake Mead, which supplies drinking water to Tucson and Phoenix via the CAP.
  • Nothing to crack down on CAP. No bill was introduced like ADWR wanted to curb CAP officials’ ability to negotiate out-of-state water deals and declare sovereign immunity from lawsuits.
  • Nothing for water metering. Before the Legislature even met, in the face of intense rural opposition, ADWR dropped a proposal to require metering of wells owned by farmers and other rural residents — now required in Tucson and Phoenix.
  • Nothing for desalination. A proposal for a desalination action plan, to identify areas where brackish groundwater could be treated, and the costs of treating the water, went nowhere.
  • Nothing to stop out-of-state water transfers. A bill requiring legislative approval to transport water out of state also failed.
  • Nothing for Sierra Vista. The Legislature didn’t pass a bill favored by development interests and the city of Sierra Vista to loosen requirements for new subdivisions in rural counties to demonstrate an adequate, 100-year water supply.

Lawmakers did pay tribute to the past, however. A non-binding resolution succeeded, one ticking off past water achievements. They include the 1980 groundwater law and 1986 and 1996 laws allowing underground water storage and creating the Arizona Water Banking Authority to recharge Colorado River water underground. The resolution pledged to continue “leadership and support for appropriate water management practices and policies that protect property and water rights.”

CLASH OF INTEREST GROUPS

Blame the inaction on a lack of consensus among interest groups, said Rep. Russell Bowers, the House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee chairman.

“How we do water policy in Arizona is very slowly and very comprehensively,” Bowers, a Mesa Republican, said last week. “There are so many interconnected parts of the water system … and consensus has to be the main part.”

Sen. Gail Griffin, author of several of the unsuccessful measures, said they were “just not ready this year,” and that legislators will try again next year.

The non-binding resolution was “a very important piece of legislation,” she said. It noted that Arizona uses less water today than in the 1950s, despite a nearly 500 percent population boost since then, she said.

Already, “Arizona is so far ahead of California and other states in water conservation and planning for people of this beautiful state,” said Griffin, a Hereford Republican who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

But if consensus means unanimous support, we are doomed, because that will never happen, said Kathy Ferris, a former Arizona Department of Water Resources director. She helped shepherd the 1980 act into existence as chair of a groundwater study commission. She now acts as a private water watchdog.

“The legislative session was a complete failure where water is concerned. We should be embarrassed,” Ferris said. “We are experiencing a two-decade-old drought. Lake Mead water levels are declining and we have lost the respect of our sister Colorado River Basin states for failing to take action to protect Lake Mead.

“In rural areas of the state, finite groundwater supplies are threatened by new wells and unlimited pumping. Every year that goes by without action means we are further in the hole, and failing to take action is a grave failure of leadership.”

Ducey’s office didn’t respond to questions from the Star about the lack of success on his water goals.

Sierra Club lobbyist Sandy Bahr, whose group took no position on the legislation other than to oppose loosening water adequacy requirements, said Ducey made a major mistake by freezing the public out of the task forces and other groups he appointed last year to fashion a water legislative agenda.

“It was like pulling teeth to get information on what was going on at those meetings,” she said.

“Anytime you don’t let people in the room, they assume you’re up to no good,” said Bahr, director of the Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon chapter.

“We need sunshine in our public processes. He didn’t have many allies, and that makes a big difference when you get to the Legislature.”

DUCEY’S WISH LIST

The centerpiece of the governor’s wish list was a measure to let the Arizona Department of Water Resources set up a program allowing cities, tribes and other water users to leave water in Lake Mead for which they had contracts through the CAP.

Currently, that authority rests solely with the agency that operates the CAP, the three-county Central Arizona Water Conservation District. ADWR officials said more water needs to be left in Mead to keep the lake from falling to dangerously low levels.

That and other measures got caught in the crossfire of the yearlong conflict between the two water agencies over power and policy. CAP took no formal position on any water legislation. But its officials sharply criticized the state proposal during public hearings. They said it would infringe on CAP’s contract rights, that they had approved such conservation measures in the past without incident, and that taking less water would raise customers’ rates.

Ferris said these measures fell to pressure from “special interests.” She wouldn’t name them, but farming, ranching and development interest groups have supported most of CAP’s stances on water issues.

She also said the CAP outgunned the ADWR because it has a much larger staff and budget and more lobbyists.

Bowers, however, said there was a lot of suspicion among some interest groups about what a state water-saving program would mean “in the hands of a governor or agency that is the king.”

Some groups were concerned that this program wouldn’t be voluntary, he said. Asked if he thought the fears were well-founded, he replied, “It doesn’t really matter when you’re afraid.”

Griffin said she’s not sure what Ferris means by special interests, adding that the public needs to vet water legislation and that the public isn’t a special interest.

Bowers called Ferris, who has worked for a Phoenix municipal water users group, “the biggest special interest in the room.”

“When you represent municipal utilities, you think that everyone else is a special interest,” he said.

Ferris is a legal counsel for the Arizona Municipal Water Utilities Association, but on these issues, she is speaking only for herself, she said. The association’s attempts to “ensure that cities can provide safe, sustainable water supplies” is a public interest, she said.

WHAT’S NEXT?

Now, Griffin and Bowers, whose committees held hearings on water across the state during the legislative session, will hold more this summer, including an as-yet-unscheduled one in Tucson. There will be meetings in June in Kingman, the Verde River Valley and Buckeye.

For the governor, water remains a priority, and his office will continue to work closely with the ADWR and other interests to secure the state’s water future, Ducey’s press secretary, Elizabeth Berry, said in an email Friday.

Since some of his proposals don’t need legislative approval, Ducey will exercise his executive authority “to continue Arizona’s strength as a leader in water management,” Berry said.

For the Sierra Club’s Bahr, the best approach would be to include conservationists, who were largely left out of the governor’s efforts, and to look at broader issues.

“We ought to be talking about some of our other rivers, and not just feeding the growth machine,” Bahr said. “Yes, we need to have an agreement on dealing with drought, which is quickly becoming our normal. But it shouldn’t be just about, ‘How can we leave more water in Lake Mead.’”

Bowers said he believes the push toward stronger water legislation will ultimately bear fruit. Right now, the biggest thing needed in legislation is a broad agreement to save water for Lake Mead so Arizona can pass a formal drought plan for the Colorado River, he said.

“That’s our hope, that we can do it and respect contracted rights for users,” he said. “If we do that, and everybody cuts back a little bit and feels a pinch, we can get something through.”

Respond: Write a letter to the editor | Write a guest opinion

 

When is TRUMP not an “ass” …

…When is TRUMP not an “ass” … I do not believe he plans anything being an “ass” comes naturally…  It’s all part of his Make America Great Again campaign…

Trump ‘plans’ to be a gigantic ass at G-7 summit, according to his staff

 

Hunter  …..Daily Kos Staff……..2018/06/06 · 09:46

The word "plan" here, is, I suspect, badly overstating things:

President Trump plans to confront other world leaders at a summit in Quebec on Friday over what he believes is a global economic system tilted against the United States, several people briefed on the plan said, escalating tensions with U.S. allies who have expressed outrage at his pivot toward protectionism.

The news here is that Trump’s staffers expect the Quebec meeting to go badly—in fact, they seem to expect it’s going to be an outright fiasco. They are therefore setting the stage for a claim that Trump meant to do that, by way of some nebulous "plan" that consists primarily or exclusively of Trump treating all the other assembled leaders like shit and everyone else in the White House nodding their heads and claiming there is some larger strategy involved in that.

Reading between the lines, the more likely scenario is that Trump, who is in a far pissier mood than usual due to anything from a spat with Melania to the Mueller probe’s tightening grip—or maybe he just didn’t get extra ice cream when he wanted extra ice cream—decided that all the other world leaders were out to get him and imagines, in his head, that he won’t be nobody’s pushover so screw them all. We already know that Trump’s staff is largely ineffectual at getting him to prepare for these things—his would-be summit with the North Korean strongman is going to be largely ad-libbed, it appears—and they certainly have no say in his temper, so the entirety of the plan is "Donald is crabby, so we’re

 

 

Trump’s Actual ‘Plan’ for the G-7 Summit Is to Just Go Around Confronting World Leaders

The president is ready to embarrass the nation yet again.

By Hunter / Daily Kos

TRUMP followers will do anything to weaken Medicare and Social Security programs

…TRUMP followers will do anything to weaken Medicare and Social Security programs…

Trump’s ‘trickle down’ tax cuts weaken the Medicare Trust Fund

 

Posted on  by AZ BlueMeanie |

President Donald Trump’s “trickle down” tax cuts for corporations and wealthy plutocrats is not meeting the GOP’s fiscal projections, and is now weakening the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds. This is what happens to Medicare when you cut taxes but not spending:

 

Trump brags about his negotiating ability, what are you saying…that he lied about that, too…???

…Trump brags about his negotiating ability, what are you saying…that he lied about that, too…???

Trump has no clear goals in North Korea summit, and one clear problem—he’s a miserable negotiator

she works for a “clown” who embarrasses America every day

..What should we expect, she works for a “clown” who embarrasses America every day…???clip_image002

‘I Am Starting to Regret Sitting Here’: Sarah Sanders Embarrasses Herself in Ridiculous Interview on CNN

By Cody Fenwick, AlterNet

She still refused to answer questions about her own conduct. READ MORE»

 

perfect credentials

…Appears he has the perfect credentials to work in TRUMP’S White House…

Fugitive arrested while reporting to work at White House was wanted in shooting of ex-girlfriend’s boyfriend

Martese Edwards had an outstanding warrant on a charge of attempted murder.

By Lynh Bui and Peter Hermann  •  Read more »