2009 wac summary - aq.co.yavapai.az.usaq.co.yavapai.az.us/docs/2010/wac/20100120_325/3003_2009...

Yavapai County Water Advisory Committee DRAFT for WAC January 20, 2009 Meeting 2009 Activities Summary and 2010 Priorities

of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Water Advisory Committee

Yavapai County Water Advisory Committee

2009 Summary and 2010 Priorities

January 20, 2009


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Water Advisory Committee Members Arizona Department of Water Resources

Yavapai-Apache Nation Yavapai- Prescott Tribe

Yavapai County Districts 1, 2, and 3 The Incorporated Cities and Towns of Yavapai County:

Camp Verde Chino Valley

Clarkdale Cottonwood

Dewey-Humboldt Jerome Prescott

Prescott Valley Sedona

Charter: The Yavapai County Water Advisory Committee is a committed coalition of communities and selected stakeholders that are dedicated to developing a management plan for the sustainable use of our regional water supply. Mission Statement: The Yavapai County Water Advisory Committee is committed to preserving sustainable water resources for future generations while enhancing the economic viability of our County. We are dedicated to meeting the long-term water resource needs of our customers - the citizens of the Yavapai County region. We will accomplish our goals by developing and recommending a total water management strategy through a consensus of our coalition members.

Contact: John Rasmussen, Coordinator, 1015 Fair Street, Prescott, AZ 86305

Telephone: 928-442-5199, email: [email protected]


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Summary In 2009, the WAC largely focused on continuation of existing projects. For example, the WAC completed the first phase of an Appraisal Level Water Resource Management Study (with U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and ADWR). The WAC also committed resources to further investigations of the Verde Valley surface water system (with Northern Arizona University). New phases of these programs will continue in 2010. The WAC funded continued monitoring of some basic hydrologic parameters in the Verde Basin in order to continue long-term record accumulation, and support the regional groundwater model prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR)). New monitoring has also been implemented in order to fill data gaps identified by work conducted in 2009. The WAC expended resources to develop scenarios of long-term growth and water-use for input into the regional model (with H3J Consulting). These data will be utilized in 2010. The WAC maintained promotion of water education in Yavapai County through the University of Arizona (UA) and Arizona Project WET resources; and funding half of a Yavapai County Cooperative Extension water-resource educator position. This will remain a priority on 2010. Communication between the Committee and the member communities, and interpreting science and our state of knowledge was a priority for 2009 and will continue in 2010. While the member communities remain consistent, some member representatives on the Committee changed in 2009. The names of the current members are included in Appendix B. In 2010, through its elected and appointed officials, the Water Advisory Committee intends to provide leadership in water resource management. As has been the Committees tradition, the WAC will acquire and share information for wise decisions and collaboration on a regional water management plan(s). The WAC is determined to promote a local/regional basis for water resource management that meets long-term water resource needs. Success will involve communicating stakeholder values, supporting “common sense” alternatives, crafting plans informed by science, and recommending viable solutions. The WAC will use its combined resources to gain credible information, understand the available science, and focus on priorities and defined strategic direction. The Water Advisory Committee seeks to inform the communities of Yavapai County and aid in achievement of confident resource-management decisions.


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

2009/2010 Projects and Priorities List The following is a list of the priority activities of the WAC for 2009. Many of these will continue in 2010. The list is followed by a more detailed summary of each item including the funding mechanism and the benefit to the WAC, 2010 Priorities/Needs, and 2010 Budget needs. Additional details on any of the projects or priorities such as, Study Plans, Scopes of Work, Project Objectives Details, and Summaries can be obtained from the WAC Coordinator.

- Central Yavapai Highlands Water Resource Management Study (CYHWRMS) (USBR, ADWR)

- Northern Arizona Regional Groundwater Model (USGS, ADWR): Model Report/Runs/ Scenarios/Interpretation

- Water budgets, data gaps, continued data collection (USGS, ADWR) - Long-Term Growth and Water-Use Scenario Development (H3J Consulting) - Verde Valley Surface Flow Model – (Northern Arizona University) - Public Education/ Water Awareness (Arizona Project WET K-12 Education,

and Adult Education through University of Arizona Yavapai County Cooperative Extension, Coordinator and WAC/TAC member appearances)

- Conservation (Coordinate with other groups, follow up on previous recommendations)

- Committee Education - Other 2009 and 2010 Activities

o Other Watersheds in Yavapai County o Local Drought Impact Group (LDIG) o Legislation o Information Series (Issue Papers) o Outreach o Liaison with other organizations and keep appraised of current events

2009 Budget - The expenses for 2009 fiscal year equaled $202,694.03 (Account Fiscal-Year-to-Date expenditures from County Finance as of June 30, 2009). The year end balance as of June 30, 2009 was $241,139.84 (Carry-over). (The 2009 calendar year end balance, as of December 31, 2009, was $191,366.40) 2010 Budget - In 2010, the Water Advisory Committee will continue to work within its budget on priority tasks and positively progress towards accomplishing its goals. The projected expenses for FY 2010 are approximately $298,000 assuming that most of the 2010 cost of the CYHWRMS Appraisal Level Study is in-kind services and not cash outlay. (I.e. staff time will cover the majority of the cost share requirement for the appraisal study this year). The projected carry over from FY ’10 is estimated at about $166,000 if the CYHWRMS expenses are low (Appendix A is a budget spreadsheet). Appendix A is a (draft) budget table. Appendix B is a list of current WAC member representatives Appendix C is the 2009 WAC meeting schedule


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Projects and Agenda of 2009; Priorities and Needs for 2010 The following is a list of 2009 priority projects of the Water Advisory Committee. Each item has associated 2010 priorities and needs.

Central Yavapai Highlands Water Resource Management Study (CYHWRMS) (USBR, ADWR): Conduct activities of the Appraisal Level Study

Study Area Map

2009 Activity summary: - Continue Study that began in mid 2008 - Work with political contacts for Planning Areas and Technical

Working Group (TWG) (technical representatives and other stakeholders) to complete Phase 1.

- Construct Planning Area maps and a summary table to document current and future population, supplies, and water use for each planning area. The sources of these data are documented in and will be used to determine if and where there will be unmet future demands.

- Distribute and present to WAC Phase 1 results and documents (including: Demand Analysis Summary Table; Demand Analysis Data Sources and Documentation; Planning Area Water Use Summary Table; Maps; and several supporting documents)

- Maintain a high level of stakeholder input and involvement (reducing cash cost to WAC, and increasing contributions of WAC member staff time).

Funding: - Cost Share Agreement (project duration): (50-50 cost share;

combination of in-kind services and WAC funds not to exceed $300,000 over three year life of project). The WAC has not transferred any funds to-date, however, in-kind service hours are being tracked and it is possible that some amount of WAC funds may be required in the future. Notwithstanding the above statement, it is


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

considered likely that in-kind services will account for the majority of the WAC’s expenses. For example, it appears all of the phase 1 costs have been staff time (in-kind services). Phase 1 in-kind contributions through December 2009 are estimated to have a value of $.......

Benefit to WAC: - Regional Planning and Management Study - Stakeholder involvement and “buy-in” - Document our knowledge on the current and future resource demands,

and alternatives for meeting long-term needs. 2010 Priorities/Needs: - Phase 1 – (Ensure “buy-in”: Educate WAC, councils and public;

Solicit criticism and respond accordingly) - Phase 2 - Begin and Complete Phase 2 (Water Supply Assessment – in

addition to present resources) and proceed to Phase 3 (Alternatives formulation and evaluation)

- Regular Updates 2010 Funding - 2010 WAC cash funds not determined (nte $50,000) (budget

projection assumes $20,000 cash for 2010). - Staff time (County, State, WAC Communities, and other stakeholders)

Northern Arizona Regional Groundwater Model (USGS, ADWR): Model Runs/ Scenarios/Interpretation

Groundwater Model Area (USGS) 2009 Activity summary: - Complete Model construction - Steady State calibration - Model Report - Plan for Transient Model Runs - Plan for Scenario Runs and Scenario Run results reporting


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Funding: - Joint Funding Agreement (annual): Cost share by USGS $62,000 for

FY 2009 (included original $40,000 plus $15,000 addition in June 2009 and $7,000 in September 2009).

- Staff time Benefit to WAC: - Water Budgets - Existing and future conditions - Predictive capabilities (model) - Identification of knowledge limitations - Data gaps and science needs 2010 Priorities/Needs: - Complete Computer Model - Complete and present written Model Report (estimate WAC

presentation in early summer) - Complete Transient runs with scenarios provided by WAC (Produce,

complete working model as originally planned) - Produce Model “Scenario Runs Report” with results of transient runs

using WAC scenarios (different from Model Report) - Understand Model abilities and limitations – (E.g. How can this be

used to understand WAC questions and aid in resource management?) - Understand data gaps and apply to future work plans (data collection

agreements) - Understand and apply knowledge gained by model to strategic goals of

the WAC - Understand and plan for inclusion of information gained by other

WAC work (i.e. NAU Verde Surface water model relation to the USGS groundwater model)

- Plan for future models/runs (other scenarios; model revisions) - Plan for information transfer and personnel training to utilize model.

(Understand how to use the model (so it doesn’t “sit on a shelf”))

2010 Funding - $0 FY 2010 WAC funds (see below) ($40,000 matching Federal funds

at this time) - Staff time

Water budgets, data gaps, continued data collection (USGS, ADWR) This includes recently funded gages, stable isotopes, and continuous well monitoring, including gravity and soil moisture at selected wells. (Also, includes potential for other monitoring work as could be identified and coordinated with other groups)

2009 Activity summary: - Apply data sets to groundwater model - Develop statistically significant (Long-term) records for key

parameters


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

- WAC Education (e.g. start with a map, describe value, etc) - Coordinate with other monitoring assessments and projects - Consider other watersheds (e.g. Agua Fria) (no action identified) - Add aquifer storage monitoring through gravity and soil moisture at

sites in Big Chino and Verde Valley (for identified model data gap) Funding: - Joint Funding Agreement (annual): WAC $85,000; matched with

USGS funds ($62,000) for groundwater model development work. (federal fiscal year 2009)

- Staff time Benefit to WAC: - Develop accurate data records - Water budgets - Use in models (e.g. USGS Northern Arizona Regional Groundwater

Flow Model) - Provide empirical basis to answer management questions. 2010 Priorities/Needs: - Proceed with Data program as assessed and modified in 2009

(continue to assess program in 2010 and modify next joint funding agreement if applicable)

- Continue monitoring to maintain long-term records (similar contract with USGS) (see 2009 activities)

- Apply data sets to WAC projects as applicable (e.g. groundwater model; and Verde Valley surface water model)

- Coordinate with other monitoring programs 2010 Funding - $83,000 FY 2010 (federal FY) WAC funds yet to be authorized (as of

January 2010) (matched with $40,000 federal above) (WAC funds include: $16,000 for gages; $20,000 for continuous water level monitoring; $14,000 for stable isotope measurement; $33,000 for aquifer storage monitoring (gravity and soil moisture))

Graph of Water-Level in Well (USGS)


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Long-Term Growth and Water-Use Scenario Development (H3J Consulting) 2009 Activities summary: - Completed Scenario #2 and #3 water-use scenario for USGS regional

groundwater model. - Submit data set for Scenario #1 for USGS model - Make available to County and others for other uses - Funding: - Contract: Continuation of work under original Project Contract of

$60,000 - Staff time Benefit to WAC: - Develop water-use scenarios for application in USGS regional flow

model. (Scenario #2 - Expansive Growth; Scenario #3 Conservation) - Provide data set to USGS for purpose of testing the USGS model. - Gain an understanding of potential growth areas, and associated future

water use values. - Use in Phase I of Central Yavapai Highlands Water Resource

Management Study (modify per stakeholder (TWG) conversations). 2010 Priorities/Needs: - Informational report to WAC - Forward Expansive Growth Scenario and Conservation Scenario

“consolidated point files” to USGS (files are complete and in TAC review)

- Complete written report - Apply to USGS Model - Apply and compare to CYHWRMS work (report as appropriate) - Make available to County and others for other uses (e.g. other types of

planning) - Assess results of USGS model, and if other scenarios are desired 2010 Funding - $0 FY 2010 WAC funds - Potential additional needs to be determined - Staff time

Consolidated Well Points Map (H3J Consulting)


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Verde Valley Surface Flow Model – (Northern Arizona University)

Model Component View (Section of Verde River)

2009 Activities summary: - Completed Phase 2. Data collection and initial model development - Prepared a geo-referenced conceptual surface-water model - Begin Phase 3: Examined Phase 2 requirements and proposed

expansion of pilot model to Phase 3 of the study to include more of the Verde River.

- Extensive laboratory and field work (e.g. model construction and channel surveys)

- Instrumentation (flow measurement) of several ditches along Verde River

- Received regular TAC updates on progress Funding: - Agreement No 08-0038 (contract) between NAU and WAC: FY 2009

$34,962 of WAC funds - Staff time Benefit to WAC - Improved basic understanding of the Verde Valley Surface water

system - Tool for use by water managers for assessment of management

alternatives - This work continues a multi-phased approach to a basic understanding

of, and gaining predictive capabilities regarding the Verde Valley surface water system (surface water model).

- Assembles and organizes data into a central location for reference - Create surface water model - This is work towards a model of the system that can be used to predict

outcomes of various management alternatives. - Help define data needs


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

- Incorporate better surface water information into USGS groundwater model

2010 Priorities/Needs: - Complete Phase 3 –

o Add pressure transducers where possible to collect basic data for low flow conditions for incorporation into the model

o Continue to build a hydraulic model of the Verde River from Mile Zero to the Camp Verde gage; including the perennial tributaries and the major diversions and ditches.

o Simulate steady, low flow condition of the Middle and Upper Verde River without diversions, and

o Coordinate with stakeholders and coordinate with those with expressed interest in the project.

o Work with and update companies and associations that operate the ditches along the reach of the study

- Update TAC and WAC and place in context of other work/future needs

- Present Report - Examine integration into USGS groundwater model 2010 Funding - $35,000 FY 2010 WAC funds (match by NAU with overhead

reduction) (amended 2008 agreement) - Staff time

Verde Valley Base Flow Analysis – Results (USGS, U of A)

2009 Activities summary: - USGS incorporated this work as appropriate into the regional

groundwater flow model. (WAC received project summary (November, 2008 WAC meeting)

- WAC received copy of poster presenting results Funding: - None in FY 2009 Benefit to WAC - This work established an updated “snapshot” of base flow conditions

along the Verde River from the Clarkdale gage to the Camp Verde gage during June 2007.

- Improved basic understanding of the surface water and groundwater interactive system of the Verde Valley.

- Applied to regional groundwater model - Identified potential data needs 2010 Priorities/Needs: - Possible: Issue Paper - Possible: Examine future work concepts 2010 Funding - None identified - Staff time


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Public Education/ Water Awareness (Arizona Project WET K-12 Education, and Adult Education through University of Arizona Yavapai County Cooperative Extension)

2009 Activity summary: - Program Coordinator at Yavapai County Extension office - Implemented existing programs County-wide - Received Program review and update Funding: - Joint funding with Cooperative Extension (fund transfer to U of A) - WAC has a budget line for partial funding of the position:

FY 2008 $11,750 (Jan – June 2008) FY 2009 $23,500 (July ‘08 – June ‘09) FY 2010 $23,500 (July ‘09 – June ‘10) FY 2011 $26,000 FY 2012 $26,500 FY 2013 $27,000

- ADWR contributed in past years. Benefits to WAC: - Jointly funded local contact for water education efforts in Yavapai

County. - Continuation of Project WET program and the Cooperative Extension

water education program. 2010 Priorities/Needs: - Continue with programs and offer support where needed. - Document activities - Promote to local schools and interested public - Update WAC 2010 Funding - $26,000 FY 2010 WAC funds (match) - Staff time

Conservation (Coordinate with other groups, follow up on recommendations)

Activities summary: - TAC evaluation / Assess WAC role in regional conservation - Verde Valley Water Festival


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Funding: - $1,500 from WAC for Verde Valley Water Festival in October 2009

(Festival also had significant community member and corporate contributions).

- Line Item for $2,000 per year for water festivals - No other funding committed. - Staff time Benefits to the WAC: - Objective of conservation has been priority - Associated with Appraisal Level Study (CYHWRMS) - Potential area of policy-setting - Participation of WAC members and other adults from the public was

an important learning opportunity. 2010 Priorities/Needs: - Water Festival Funding - Possible: WAC Recommendations to County – follow up - Monitor and Coordinate with others organizations (such as Upper

Verde River Watershed Protection Coalition) - Document existing efforts (E.g. Coalition, ADWR) - Possibility of funding printing conservation booklet that results from

survey 2010 Funding - Staff time - Possible $2,500 for water festivals

Committee Education – The WAC heard from several speakers on a variety of topics in 2009. The WAC will continue to educate itself (and public in attendance at meetings) through speakers at meetings, issue papers, and other means. The purpose of such education is to understand science results and alternatives for managing the water resources of their jurisdictions and the County. Additionally speakers and information is often needed for awareness of other relevant activities in the watershed and or legislative activities. Table 1, below, is a list of the presentation topics and presenters for 2009.

2010 Priorities/Needs - WAC will need to focus on results of existing work in order to know

how it applies to management applications (much can be done through issue papers (below) and “workshops” on specific items)

- Understand processes and results of projects so that appropriate level of confidence can be obtained and justified

- Focus WAC on overall objectives and strategic plan of WAC - Continue WAC “Information Series” documents - Transfer knowledge to individual community needs


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Table 1: WAC Presenters 2009

DATE TITLE SPEAKER February 18 Prescott

WAC Information Series #1 – Where is the Water?

John Rasmussen/TAC

March 18 Cottonwood

Legislative update Tom Whitmer

April 15 Prescott

WAC Information Series #2 – How much is there?

John Rasmussen/TAC

May 20 Cottonwood

School Water Audit at Cottonwood Oak Creek Middle School by 7th Graders

Teacher Jayne Lee and Students

June 18 Prescott

WAC Information Series #2 and #3– How much is there? and Water Budgets

John Rasmussen/TAC

Sep 16 Cottonwood

WAC Information Series #3 – Water Budgets John Rasmussen/TAC

Oct 21 Prescott

USGS TNC Verde Study - Establishing environmental flows for sustainable water management: Upper and Middle Verde River watersheds, Arizona

Dan Campbell TNC; Jim Leenhouts USGS; Chris Konrad USGS; Anne Brasher USGS; Steve Wiele USGS;

Nov 18 Cottonwood

Appraisal Study (CYHWRMS) Update – Draft Phase 1 Results

Coordinator John Rasmussen; Leslie Graser ADWR

Other 2009 and 2010 Activities Other Watersheds in Yavapai County - Needs assessments of other County Watersheds (in addition to the Verde River watershed were identified as a priority item for 2009 (Agua Fria, Bill Williams, and Hassayampa). In 2009, progress was made in assessing needs of the Upper Agua Fria basin through work of the Upper Agua Fria Watershed Partnership. A specific project or critical need has not been clearly defined. However, a budget line is present in the WAC budget for 2010 when a project is identified, justified and approved by the WAC. Local Drought Impact Group (LDIG) – WAC is serving as oversight committee for LDIG. The goals of the LDIG are to Assess and report local drought conditions and impacts; Mitigate and respond to drought on a local level (Preparedness Plan); educate the public and improve awareness regarding drought The LDIG was not very active in 2009. A draft of the Preparedness report had been circulating in the preparedness committee. This should be reassessed during 2010 and made available for review by the WAC.


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

No funding, except some staff time, is required by the WAC. The acting steering committee consists of Jeff Schalau (Chair of Education Participant Group; County Extension), Nick Angiolillo (Chair of Preparedness Group; County Emergency Management), Bob Adams (Chair of Monitoring Group; NRCS) Crystal Frost (ADWR), Tom Thurman (BOS), John Rasmussen (WAC Coordinator), Bob Arambula (NRCS), and Kresta Faaborg (NRCS). The primary meeting topics have been the nature of the participant groups, participant group goals/strategies, state involvement, and next steps. Legislation – The WAC received regular legislative updates in 2009 and will continue to receive regular legislative updates in 2010. Both State and Federal Legislation will be considered. The WAC will discuss and possibly react as a group to particular legislation; however, most action regarding legislation will be taken by the individual members rather than the Committee as a whole. In addition to tracking by the ADWR (www.azwater.gov), legislative summaries can also be found at the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association website (http://www.amwua.org/). Federal legislation can be tracked at several websites. Issue Papers – The WAC will benefit from summaries of issues and interpretation of science. In 2010, The TAC will be tasked with preparing issue papers and recommendations on relevant subjects. Examples include:

Information Series: Water Quality USGS Work: Summarize USGS regional model for the WAC NAU Work: Verde Valley Surface Water work H3J and CYHWRMS: All relevant aspects of these projects as described above

Outreach – The WAC and TAC members and the Coordinator recognize the importance of communication with the public, town and city councils, and etc in order to inform and gain approval of WAC plans and activities. Examples include:

Website: The WAC website will be continuously updated and evaluated; and improved where practical. WAC Updates: In 2009, the Coordinator presented a WAC update to most of the WAC member councils as well as some community organizations. The Coordinator will continue to update councils in FY 2010.


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Liaison with other organizations and keep appraised of current events – It is a high priority to coordinate with other organizations in appropriate ways that serve the WAC goals and mission. Additionally, the WAC will stay appraised of other activities in the County through regular updates. The Members, Coordinator and TAC members will attend meetings and conferences and report to the Committee as appropriate.

Water Groups Regularly Attended by Coordinator: - Verde Watershed Association (VWA) - Upper Agua Fria Watershed Partnership (UAFWP) - Upper Verde River Watershed Protection Coalition (UVRWPC) - Coconino Plateau Water Advisory Council (CPWAC) - Arizona Project WET Advisory Board (APW) - NAU Water Research and Education Program Board (WREP) Water Groups regularly monitored by Coordinator: - Above groups - Statewide Water Advisory Group (SWAG) - ADWR Groundwater Users Advisory Group (GUAC) - Verde River Basin Partnership (VRBP) - Others less frequently as needed


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Appendix A:

WAC Budget Table (Draft, 1/14/10)

The table below is an excerpt from a WAC Budget Spreadsheet (version 01-14-08 Draft). It shows income and expenditures for the previous few years as well as projected budgets for the next few years. There is a section on Income, Operating Expenses, Committed Project Funds, Potential Projects, and there is a bottom line with expenses and carry-over. The gray columns are past years.

Water Advisory Committee Budget Brief v011410 DRAFT

7/1/09 Account Balance FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13

Beginning Fund Balance 241,140 203,150 241,140 Income Communities 226,000 216,000 229,333 229,333 229,333Interest 3,950 7,234 5,084 2,757 2,189Operating Expenses Coordinator Salary & ERE 91,573 92,000 92,000 93,000 94,000Supplies, etc 2,843 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 Workshop attendance funding 0 500 500 500 500Committed Project Funds Water Festival**** 2,000 1,500 Water Festival Verde remaining**** 13,443 Verde Valley Surface Flow Model (NAU) Phase 2 34,962 Verde Valley Surface Flow Model - NAU Phase 3 17,500 17,500 Reclamation Appraisal Level Supply Study* 100,000 50,000 In kind services Projects (CYHWRMS) -60,000 In kind services Staff (CYHWRMS) -36,000 -20,000 H3J Continued Work 20,000 USGS Total 72,750 USGS Gages/Monitoring

Williamson Valley gage 16,000 16,000 16,000 16,000

Continuous water level/ppt 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000

Stable isotope 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 Precip Gages


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

USGS Gravity Stations Big Chino + Verde 33,000 35,000 35,000 35,000USGS Refined Model (USGS Groundwater Model) Education: County-wide/ Co-op & Project WET Position) 23,500 23,500 26,000 26,500 27,000 jrr011410 Potential Project Funding (TAC Recommendation) FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 jrr011410 Other Data or Model Needs 40,000 40,000 40,000 Upper Agua Fria Needs - Assess and Data Collection 15,000 15,000 Water Festivals 500 2,000 2,000 2,000Conservation- Regional Conservation Materials 5,000 NAU Digital Framework Model Verde H3J Other work Verde USGS follow up work Don Bills Additional USGS Model Runs Sub Area Model Development Precipitation gages (left out of above) analysis of snow pack trends/ climate perspective Geophysical Well Logging of new wells Metering of volunteer domestic wells** Emergent Chemicals (e.g. USGS Carruth)*** Others

TOTALS Projected Expenses 212,666 294,905 312,000 251,000 252,500

Actual or Projected Carry Over 241,139 169,469 91,886 72,976 51,998

Actual Carry Over 241,139


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Appendix B:

WAC and TAC Member Representatives

Current WAC Membership (as of January 2010)

Member Representative Title Alternate

Yavapai Apache Nation Billie Garner Lands & Water Division

Norman Smith, Council

Yavapai Prescott Tribe Chris Moss Staff AZ Dept Water Resources Thomas Whitmer Statewide

Planning Manager

Yavapai County District 1 Carol Springer Supervisor Yavapai County District 2 Thomas Thurman Supervisor Mary Hoadley, Upper

Agua Fria PartnershipYavapai County District 3 Chip Davis Supervisor Dick Ellis, Sedona Town of Camp Verde Jackie Baker Council Town of Chino Valley Jim Bunker Mayor City of Cottonwood Diane Joens Mayor Tim Elinski, Council Town of Clarkdale Doug Von Gausig Mayor Jerry Wiley, Council Town of Dewey-Humboldt

Len Marinaccio Mayor Don Tebbe, Council

Town of Jerome Jane Moore Citizen Lew Currier, Council City of Prescott Mary Ann Suttles Council Town of Prescott Valley Michael Flannery Council Harold Wise, Council City of Sedona Rob Adams Mayor Brent Bitz, Water

Committee

Current Technical Administrative Committee (TAC)

TAC Member Title Loyd Barnett Watershed Consultant Leslie Graser Water Manager, City of

Prescott Robert Hardy Cottonwood Water

Resources Manager Mark Holmes Chino Valley Water

Resources Manager John Munderloh Prescott Valley Water

Resources Manager Dr. Abe Springer Professor, NAU Geology

Department Vacant


of 20 Jrr v1-12-10]

Appendix C:

2010 WAC Meeting Schedule

Yavapai County Water Advisory Committee 2010 Regular Meeting Schedule

MEETING DATE* LOCATION**

January 20, 2010 Cottonwood February 17, 2010 Prescott March 17, 2010 Cottonwood April 21, 2010 Prescott May 19, 2010 Cottonwood June 16, 2010 Prescott July 21, 2010 Cottonwood August 18, 2010 Prescott September 15, 2010 Cottonwood October 20, 2010 Prescott November 17, 2010 Cottonwood December 15, 2010 Prescott

________________________________________________________________________ * Third Wednesday of each month (2:00 – 4:00 PM). Changes and cancellations will be posted. ______________________________________________________________________________ ** Location: Prescott Location: Cottonwood Location: Board Room Board Room County Administrative Services Building County Building - Verde Annex 1015 Fair Street 10 South 6th Street Prescott, Arizona Cottonwood, Arizona Meeting may occasionally be held at another location – changes will be posted with agenda. _______________________________________________________________________ Contacts: Recording Secretary - Chris Moran, 928-639-8110 [email protected] Coordinator - John Rasmussen, 928-442-5199 [email protected]

2009 wac summary - aq.co.yavapai.az.usaq.co.yavapai.az.us/docs/2010/wac/20100120_325/3003_2009...

Documents