Bill panned as ‘major red flag’ for health of Great Salt Lake advances in House committee
Republican lawmakers and water advocates found themselves at odds Friday over the meaning of a bill, with lawmakers saying it would help bring more water to the Great Salt Lake while advocates called it a “major red flag” that threatened the health of the ailing lake.
Disagreements and potential confusion over the bill’s implications did not prevent it from passing the House Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Committee on Friday, but it did prompt a warning from the Republican Party committee chairman, who urged stakeholders to settle their differences.
“Given the concerns that have been raised … I would like to go back and ask that you continue to work with these dissenting votes … and take into account the comments of the people who made comments today,” Rep. Carl Albrecht, R-Richfield, told the bill’s sponsor, Rep. David Shallenberger, R-Orem. “I would just encourage more dialogue as you move the bill through the process.
Shallenberger told the committee that his bill aims to “streamline” the process of getting water to the Great Salt Lake when people apply for water rights, narrowing the scope of concerns the state water engineer can consider when deciding whether to contest a water rights application.
“This really targets the Great Salt Lake and helps keep it … in a healthy and strong place,” he said. “We want her to be able to do what she does best, and that means not focusing on economic analysis or air quality issues or other things like that.”
Utah currently requires the state engineer to consider denying applications for water rights that could “unreasonably affect public recreation or the natural stream environment, or be detrimental to the public welfare.” HB60 would require the engineer to “consider only matters directly related to: the beneficial use of water; or the quantity, quality, or availability of water in the State. »
Lawmakers and advocates both agreed they wanted to strengthen the health of the Great Salt Lake, but couldn’t have been further apart on whether HB60 actually did anything to help.
“This bill absolutely and positively streamlines the draining of the Great Salt Lake, make no mistake,” said Zachary Frankel of the Utah Rivers Council. “Allowing this bill to move forward is a major wake-up call. »
Frankel said the bill limits the number of people who can challenge water rights claims in court, “thus eliminating (Utahns’) ability to benefit from the three branches of government, the checks and balances of democracy.”
“There are simply no two ways about reading this bill and saying it will benefit the Great Salt Lake,” he added.
Shallenberger said the state engineer would work with other departments, including the Department of Environmental Quality, to address the environmental impacts of certain water rights claims, but advocates were unhappy with the bill’s language and wanted more clarity to ensure those considerations were taken into account.
“I also share the belief that this bill is well-intentioned and that the goal is the same for all of us: to help increase the flow of water to the lake,” said Rep. John Arthur, D-Cottonwood Heights, who said he needed more clarity to support it.
HB60 ultimately passed the committee on partisan lines, 7-2.
