Boulder City council supports new water source

Jeffrey Libby

Thursday, Jan. 18, 2001 | 10:57 a.m.

Boulder City will most likely spend $34 million to establish a second waterline from Lake Mead, allowing the city to tap its full allotment through the Colorado River Agreement.

The City Council voted 4-1 Wednesday night in favor of the project, even though in a worst-case scenario it could raise water rates as much as 36 percent.

The project would bring an eight-mile water pipeline from a planned facility in Henderson through Railroad Pass to a proposed reservoir north of the city airport.

The waterline would be built as part of a $2.1 billion water delivery system planned by the Southern Nevada Water Authority for the Las Vegas Valley.

The water authority planned to authorize construction bids today.

Wednesday night marked the last opportunity for the city to decline the deal.

Councilman Bill Smith, who cast the lone vote against the agreement, said it put the city at too much risk.

In order to pay for the project, the city is depending on additional revenue from three proposed golf courses. Only one has gone beyond informal conversations.

City Manager John Sullard said Eldorado Energy could also expand its facility.

But even if the golf course deals fall through and rates increase 36 percent, Councilman Bryan Nix said, Boulder City residents would still pay less than water users in Las Vegas.

Boulder City water users pay about $1 per 1,000 gallons. Las Vegans pay from $1.50 to $3 per 1,000 gallons, Public Works Director Phillip Henry said.

Nix, a board member on the water authority, also suggested the possibility that the $10.6 million buy-in fee to the proposed pump facility in Henderson could be deferred.

That would delay any potential rate hikes for two to three years, Nix said, a time period great enough to close a deal on new golf courses.

Council members briefly discussed an alternative route paralleling the existing waterline. But that line travels through federally owned land and could take years to negotiate, council members said. Such a move would also render useless the $2.4 million the city has invested in the water authority's project since 1998.