Governor Hobbs vetoed HB2572 on Friday, a bill that was set to shift control of groundwater management to local communities in rural Arizona. The proposed legislation, backed by State Representative Gail Griffin, aimed to empower county supervisors and local Groundwater User Advisory Councils by giving them the final word on groundwater management plans and goals, as well as the authority to appoint council members.
Advocates of HB2572 argued for the necessity of local decision-making in the management of their water resources. Under the existing framework, all decisions within Active Management Areas (AMAs) stem from the Director of Water Resources in Phoenix, an appointee of the governor. Working from the state's capital, rather than at the local level, this director holds the reins on conservation measures and has the final say on groundwater management, despite the presence of local advisory councils. According to a press release issued by Griffin's office, the members of these councils don't even need to be Arizona residents or users of the groundwater basin they are advising on, which opens the door for outside interests to potentially sway vital resource management.
Griffin's view, detailed in the same press release, portrays HB2572 as a direct response to these shortcomings, hoping to "conserve water, increase groundwater recharge, address domestic wells, and increase local control without strings attached or crashing local economies." The representative laments that without the critical data needed for future planning, rural communities are at a disadvantage, especially in preventing their wells from drying up. "Governor Hobbs’ veto comes at a time when she has said that she would continue to use executive power to unilaterally establish new Active Management Areas throughout the state—even though she knows that Active Management Areas do not provide local control," Griffin states.
In contrast, Governor Hobbs has shown a preference towards a management framework that potentially imposes stricter regulations and fees than urban areas like Phoenix and Tucson face. While her exact motivations behind the veto have not been explicitly stated, critics imply that her decision undermines rural input and drives a centralized control agenda. Talking to the press in a recent statement from her office, Griffin voiced her hope that the governor "would join us in supporting real solutions for rural Arizonans."
