Two major water development bills carrying a potential future price tag of $700 million began moving downstream in the Legislature on Wednesday with limited opposition but a substantial measure of uncertainty expressed by state senators who declined to vote.
A bill (LB1023) launching development of water recreation projects throughout the state, including potential development of a 4,000-acre lake between Lincoln and Omaha, sailed past first-stage consideration on a 29-4 count with 10 senators choosing not to cast a vote.
A proposal (LB1015) to commit the state to a $500 million South Platte River canal and reservoir project to claim and secure a continuing water supply guaranteed to the state in a century-old compact with Colorado was advanced on a 36-3 score with nine senators declining to cast a vote.
That bill would be funded with $53.5 million from the state's cash reserve fund to begin purchasing land and initiating engineering and design.
People are also reading…
Eventual cost of 60 miles of canal and two reservoirs has been pegged at $503 million as the state proceeds to exercise its water rights in the face of rapid development of Colorado's Front Range, where surging population growth is accompanied by development of an array of projects that would capture water from the river before it enters Nebraska.
The water recreation projects would include $34.3 million for marina development at Lake McConaughy near Ogallala, $42.4 million for construction of an event center at Niobrara State Park in Knox County along with $41.5 million in marina improvements at Lewis and Clark Lake, and $25 million in flood mitigation projects along the Lower Platte River.
The proposed lake between Nebraska's two urban centers attracted some opposition, most of it based on concerns that it might turn into "a playground for the wealthy," rather than a resource available to all Nebraskans, accompanied by fears that it could impact future Lincoln and Omaha water supplies.
Although no senators from the two big cities voted against advancement of the bill, six Omaha senators and Sens. Adam Morfeld and Anna Wishart, both of Lincoln, chose not to vote on the motion to move the bill forward.
Sen. Mike Hilgers of Lincoln, who sponsored the bill as chairman of the Legislature's so-called STARWARS Committee, said studies are underway to assure that there would not be any potential negative effects on the future water supply for the two cities.
"If there would be a negative impact," he pledged, "this project won't move forward."
Wishart said the proposal includes $1 million budgeted for an independent hydrology study to "make sure that Lincoln and Omaha water would not be impacted."
Sen. John Cavanaugh of Omaha said he wants guaranteed assurance that there would be "permanent public access to at least a portion of the lake," addressing concerns expressed by some Nebraskans that the lake could be dominated by the wealthy who may build lake houses.
Hilgers, who has suggested that the lake could spur a billion dollars in accompanying private development, said he wants to "assure significant public access to the lake" and will offer a future amendment to note that.
The project "could be transformative," he said, and the array of proposed developments throughout the state would provide "opportunities to enhance the natural resources and beauty in the state," all of which should be attractive for future generations.
"This is big thinking," Sen. Mike Flood of Norfolk said. "This is extremely visionary ... a brilliant opportunity to build the state."
Water recreation development could help the state meet its goal of attracting and retaining a skilled workforce, he said.
Sen. Dan Hughes of Venango said the water projects could trigger "a tremendous boost in our economy through tourism."
"Maybe vision is expensive," Sen. Robert Hilkemann of Omaha said in supporting the proposal. "Let's move Nebraska forward."
No specific location for the lake has been publicly identified.
Sen. Steve Lathrop of Omaha raised concerns about the $500 million South Platte development proposal.
"What's the urgency?" he asked. "I'm very skeptical of this."
The state may need to "stop cutting taxes to pay for it," Lathrop said. Â