Connect with us

Utah

Utah cities hit a snag as they write plans to reuse wastewater flowing to the Great Salt Lake

Published

on

Utah cities hit a snag as they write plans to reuse wastewater flowing to the Great Salt Lake


A flurry of water reuse claims could threaten to take more water from the Great Salt Lake, but the dozens of applications sit unapproved because of statutory issues.

(Trent Nelson | The Salt Lake Tribune) Water treated by the North Davis Sewer District makes its way into Farmington Bay on Tuesday, May 31, 2022. Lawmakers passed a bill meant to bar reuse of treated wastewater that currently flows to the lake, but may have spurred a flurry of applications for reuse projects instead.

This article is published through the Great Salt Lake Collaborative, a solutions journalism initiative that partners news, education and media organizations to help inform people about the plight of the Great Salt Lake – and what can be done to make a difference before it is too late. Read all of our stories at greatsaltlakenews.org.

An effort by Utah cities and other government bodies to get more use out of their water supplies has hit a wall — because of mistakes in the paperwork.

Advertisement

Dozens of applications from cities and special districts seeking to reuse treated wastewater lacked crucial elements, including plans to replace water that would otherwise flow to the Great Salt Lake, according to online documentation from the Utah Division of Water Rights.

As Utah grows, water providers have looked to reuse treated wastewater “as a means to stretch their water supply,” said Deputy State Engineer Blake Bingham. That’s especially true as water becomes more scarce, he said.

Those providers have to get permission before doing so, though, and the state received a deluge of these applications in the second half of 2023.

Before 2023, officials with the Division of Water Rights only had 25 reuse projects cross their desks in about as many years. About a third came from southern Utah communities outside of the Great Salt Lake basin.

Then, from March until Nov. 1 of last year, the division received 45 water reuse applications. All but one came from counties inside the lake’s watershed.

Advertisement

The applications flooded in after the Utah Legislature approved a bill that barred the Division of Water Rights from approving any new water reuse applications for projects that would have otherwise discharged to the Great Salt Lake or its tributary rivers.

It included some exceptions:

  • Water reuse proposals designed specifically to supply water to the lake.

  • Projects that include water rights owned by the federal government.

  • Projects approved subject to a plan that replaces any water that would have otherwise flowed to the lake.

  • Proposals filed before Nov. 1, 2023.

The spate of applications rang alarm bells for one expert — Brigham Daniels, professor at the University of Utah’s S.J. Quinney College of Law — who told The Tribune in December that approving all of them would “make a big dent in the opposite direction” of the goal to save the Great Salt Lake.

Yet what Bingham, the engineer, said was likely a “flash-to-bang” by cities and other water providers in applications to get their foot in the door has resulted in a host of issues within the applications.

The state engineer’s office reviews applications to identify underlying water rights and to make sure the reuse would not exceed the amount of water the providers are allowed to consume and completely remove from the system, Bingham said.

Advertisement

Under a somewhat new sequence, he said, providers must apply first to the Division of Water Rights and then to the Division of Water Quality — an agency that evaluates the proposals for water quality issues.

Water providers were always supposed to get approval from the two divisions, Bingham said, but the new sequence makes sure the applications make it to both agencies.

The state engineer’s office has not yet approved any of the dozens of applications received toward the end of last year, according to the Division of Water Rights website.

One was rejected for failure to advertise, and for a reuse proposal that the state engineer found was “inconsistent with underlying water rights.”

The division has returned dozens of others because they did not include everything required by state law.

Advertisement

“I think a lot of the challenge is trying to get the applicants to comply with the requirements in the statute,” Bingham said. “And one of the requirements is a reuse authorization contract.”

Because cities don’t apply for water reuse often, he said, it can be hard to understand what’s needed, especially when it comes to a water replacement plan.

Several cities thought they didn’t have to file a plan to send a comparable amount of water back into the Great Salt Lake’s watershed, he said.

Historically, water providers have tended to approach the state engineer before filing to make sure they have their ducks in a row, Bingham said.

The office is happy to help when people reach out for it, he said, but there didn’t seem to be a demand before the flood of applications last year.

Advertisement

Megan Banta is The Salt Lake Tribune’s data enterprise reporter, a philanthropically supported position. The Tribune retains control over all editorial decisions.



Source link

Utah

Voices: America at 250 could use a little more Utah

Published

on

Voices: America at 250 could use a little more Utah


Not only the Utah that we are today, but the Utah that we can choose to become.

(Rick Egan | The Salt Lake Tribune) Gabriel Meneses makes one of the limited edition flags for the United States 250th anniversary at Colonial Flag in Sandy on Monday, June 1, 2026.



Source link

Continue Reading

Utah

President Trump expected to reduce the size of Utah monuments

Published

on

President Trump expected to reduce the size of Utah monuments


  • President Donald Trump is expected to sign executive orders reducing the size of Utah’s Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears national monuments on Monday.
  • The monuments have shifted in size between administrations, with Trump reducing them in 2017 and President Joe Biden restoring their original boundaries in 2021.
  • Environmental groups and Utah officials are divided over the potential reduction, with critics threatening legal challenges and supporters seeking more local control.

President Donald Trump plans to sign an executive order on Monday afternoon shrinking the size of two national monuments in Utah, which currently cover a combined 5,094 square miles, the Deseret News confirmed on background with a Utah source.

The two national monuments — Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears — have oscillated in size through the previous several presidential administrations.

Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument was created by President Bill Clinton in September 1996. Bears Ears National Monument was created by President Barack Obama in December 2016. Both designations received a mixed reception among Utahns.

In 2017, Trump reduced Bears Ears by about 85% and Grand Staircase by about 46%.

Then when former President Joe Biden took office in 2021, he restored them to their original sizes.

Advertisement

Trump is expected to sign the executive orders in the Oval Office on Monday at 4:30 EST.

In a statement to the Deseret News on Friday, the White House said, “Any policy announcement will come directly from the President. This reporting about potential executive orders is pure speculation.”

National monument designations place restrictions on what recreational and economic activity residents and visitors can do on the land. The designation also prohibits anyone from pursuing new mining claims, oil and gas leasing, coal exploration or new commercial infrastructure projects.

Tourists look at the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument ion Friday, May 14, 2021. | Laura Seitz, Deseret News

However, the Bureau of Land Management previously found that Bears Ears and Grand Staircase have little to offer in terms of oil and gas potential, the Deseret News previously reported.

For nearly three decades since Clinton designated the first monument, Utah’s federal delegation has asked for reductions in land size for more local control, recreation and grazing.

Advertisement

Recently, Utah Rep. Celeste Maloy challenged the monument’s resource management plan to return to a plan the first Trump administration outlined in 2020 with help from local Utahns.

However, her bill died after missing a key deadline to make it to the Senate for a vote.

People react to the potential land reduction

Butler Wash Ruins, a cliff dwelling that was built and occupied by the Ancestral Puebloans in about 1200 A.D., can be seen at Bears Ears National Monument on Wednesday, June 4, 2025. The cliff dwelling features multiple habitation, storage and ceremonial structures. | Tess Crowley, Deseret News

Based on an initial report by ABC4, environmental groups are already vocalizing their disapproval over a potential reduction of monument land.

Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance Executive Director Scott Braden described the potential executive order as “unlawful, unwise and unacceptable,” in a press release sent to the Deseret News.

“This action will only bring uncertainty and chaos to places that should instead be protected for their rich biodiversity, unique geology, and remarkable cultural values,” he wrote. Braden said SUWA was preparing to fight the executive order through lawsuits or by lobbying in Congress.

On X, former Utah state Sen. Nate Blouin referenced the land reduction in conjunction with the Babylon Fire, which as of Friday is 25% contained and has covered more than 100,000 acres in southeastern Utah.

Advertisement

“As the largest wildfire in the U.S. burns pristine landscapes in southeastern Utah, Trump is threatening to shrink both Grand Staircase & Bears Ears National Monuments,” Blouin wrote. “This unprecedented move is happening without input from the region’s ancestral inhabitants.

Ricky Agnew, left, and wife Christy Agnew, right, look at petroglyphs on Newspaper Rock at Bears Ears National Monument on Monday, Dec. 1, 2025. The petroglyphs on Newspaper Rock date back to 1,500 years ago. The older art is attributed to the Basketmaker and Ancestral Puebloan people who inhabited this region from approximately 500 B.C. to 1350 A.D. The more recent petroglyphs are attributed to the Ute people who still live in the Four Corners area. | Tess Crowley, Deseret News



Source link

Continue Reading

Utah

Tyler Robinson preliminary hearing expected to wrap up Friday – KSLNewsRadio

Published

on

Tyler Robinson preliminary hearing expected to wrap up Friday – KSLNewsRadio


PROVO — The preliminary hearing for Tyler Robinson is expected to wrap up Friday morning in Provo. But it will still be several weeks before a decision is made on whether there is enough probable cause to bind him over for trial.

Robinson, 23, is charged with 10 crimes, the most serious being aggravated murder, in the death of conservative political activist Charlie Kirk, who was shot and killed on the campus of Utah Valley University on Sept. 10, 2025. A preliminary hearing is held to determine whether there is sufficient probable cause to go to trial on the charges levied against a defendant.

The Utah County Attorney’s Office finished calling their witnesses to testify on Thursday. Robinson’s defense team, who have already called two forensic experts from the FBI and ATF to testify, are expected to call one more on Friday before resting. Robinson has been attempting to cast doubt on the reliability of DNA testing, arguing that test results are subjective.

Prosecutors have objected several times to the line of questioning, arguing that it falls well outside the bounds of what is needed for a preliminary hearing. Even 4th District Judge Tony Graf warned defense attorney Michael Burt on Thursday during one line of questioning, “I feel we are exiting the orbit of probable cause.”

Advertisement

At the end of a preliminary hearing, both sides typically give closing arguments, and the judge decides if there is enough evidence for a defendant to proceed to trial. On Thursday, Graf granted a defense motion for each side to first submit briefs summarizing their arguments. The state will submit its brief by July 28, followed by the defense’s reply on Aug. 11 and the state’s rebuttal on Aug. 18. After that, another hearing will be held on Sept. 1 for both sides to present their cases in court.

Also on Thursday, portions of the video interview of Robinson’s roommate and boyfriend at the time of Kirk’s death, Lance Twiggs, were shown to the courtroom after much debate.

In addition, screenshots of the text messages exchanged between Twiggs and Robinson, a note Robinson left for Twiggs and messages on Discord that Robinson allegedly sent to his friend group prior to turning himself in, were all displayed in court.

For each piece of evidence introduced during the week-long hearing, Graf has had to decide:

  1. Whether to admit that evidence into the record;
  2. Whether that evidence should be shown to everyone in the courtroom;
  3. Whether that evidence can be filmed by the livestream camera broadcasting the hearing.

Robinson’s defense team remains adamant that broadcasting evidence to people outside the courtroom will jeopardize their client’s right to a fair trial by prejudging a future jury pool. Prosecutors want the evidence shown to everyone for the sake of transparency. Graf has compromised on several pieces of evidence by allowing them to be displayed to people in the courtroom but not on the livestream feed.

The extended debates over what evidence can be shown to the public and what is only viewed by attorneys and the judge have prompted Jeff Neiman, the attorney for Erika Kirk and the Kirk family, to address the courtroom several times, both in person and in a briefing filed Wednesday night, calling on the court to make all evidence public.

Advertisement

“For 10 months, the victim’s family has waited for this preliminary hearing. Erika Kirk, the widow of Charlie Kirk, and his grieving parents traveled to this courtroom for one reason: to be present at these proceedings and to bear witness to the evidence concerning the death of their husband and son. At certain points throughout the preliminary hearing, the Kirk family sat in the room while evidence was admitted but not presented for their viewing. They were present in body, yet denied the very thing their presence was meant to secure: their ability to meaningfully observe the preliminary hearing,” Neiman said. “The victim’s family’s position is simple. At a minimum, every exhibit entered into evidence during the preliminary hearing must be visible to every person lawfully present in the courtroom.”

Erika Kirk and Charlie Kirk’s parents have been in the courtroom all week for the preliminary hearing.

At Neiman’s request, Graf agreed that at the end of court on Friday, he will show to the courtroom only the enhanced UVU surveillance video allegedly showing Robinson’s movements across the roof of the Losee Center and when he drops off the roof and runs to a wooded area off Campus Drive. The video includes moments in which film editors zoom in on the alleged gunman and impose a red circle around him to make it easier to view. The video was originally submitted as evidence but was only shown to Graf and attorneys.

Friday’s hearing begins at 9 a.m. Watch it livestreamed here:

We want to hear from you.

Have a story idea or tip? Send it to the KSL NewsRadio team here.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending