Economic climate change hits water policy

For all of global warming's impact on Washington's water supplies, the economic climate will have the greater near-term effect on state water management and planning.

Melting state revenues have inspired a serious conversation with a more immediate influence on the expense and access to water than skimpy Cascade snowpacks.

Taxpayers cover about 98 percent of the cost of state water-resource services through an increasingly unpredictable general fund, according to the state Department of Ecology. In a time of shaky finances there is a move to replace unstable tax resources with user fees.

"The era of cheap, abundant water supplies is over," Ecology Director Ted Sturdevant said as his department announced a campaign to solicit comments and ideas from the public. "With population growth, the need for development, the challenges of restoring fish runs, and coping with climate change, unless we change the way we manage our water resources, there won't be enough water to meet essential needs."

In the scheme of state budgeting, only three of the department's 10 programs — water resources, air quality and shoreline management — depend on the general fund. But processing water rights can run $10,000 per application. Instead of billing taxpayers, those who get use of the water would pay.

Sturdevant is blunt about Washington water supplies and the future. "We are in a scary place," he said in a telephone conversation. There is not enough water for cities as they grow, agriculture's desire to irrigate more land, and to sustain salmon runs and stream flows.

The department's Water Resources Program has prepared a report to the Legislature that not only explores imposition of user fees in pursuit of more consistent funding, but also seeks to update state water laws and application processes.

The discussion is prodded along from three directions. The reality of climate impacts and water supplies, Gov. Chris Gregoire's imperatives to trim the budget and rethink government finances, and encouragement from the Legislature to develop better tools.

Last session the Legislature passed E2SSB 6267, with specific direction and opportunity to change how applications are processed and paid for. Sturdevant reports a backlog of thousands of permit applications.

Leaner government means taking a look at who benefits, the role of state government and the practical goal of making programs self-supporting.

Maia Bellon, deputy program manager for the state Water Resources Program, explains the recommendations prepared for the Office of Financial Management and the Legislature looks at fee options and management structure. For example, annual right-holder fees to pay for services provided.

Another target is 19th century state water laws and how they might be revised for modern times and values. Bellon said serious thought is being given to amending relinquishment laws — use-it-or-lose-it — to create more incentives to promote and reward conservation.

Overseeing the state's water programs requires vast amounts of data to plan ahead and provide efficient service. The old ways of paying for it have not worked, and management practices are ripe for change.

Bellon illustrates the intense competition for water by noting the city of Rosyln has 1903 water rights that are junior to other claims on diminishing supplies.

Paying for the studies, analyses and modeling to get creative and efficient in capturing, storing and delivering water when it is needed will take new tools, and new ways to pay for it.

The discussion will get loud and animated, but the economic and climatic conditions demand it.

Lance Dickie's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. His e-mail address is ldickie@seattletimes.com