All of which came as good news to the state's water financing task force on Tuesday.

The group has been meeting regularly since last fall to create financing proposals for what will surely be two of the most expensive projects in state history. Combined, the Powell pipeline and Bear River project are expected to cost from $500 million to $600 million.

The fact that the projects now probably won't have to be built at the same time is expected to ease some of that financial burden, or at least spread it out.

The projected opening of the Powell pipeline has been moved up to 2018 because of a continuing population boom in Washington and Iron counties that shows no signs of abating. But the Bear River project, a proposed series of dams and reservoirs, may not be needed until 2025 - a full decade later than originally thought - because of new water made available through the Utah Lake System and continued water savings made by Wasatch Front residents during the six-year drought.

"That really helps," said state Treasurer Ed Alter, the task force chairman. "We don't want to do these two expensive projects at once. We want to do one, then the other."

The Utah Lake System, the final phase of the Central Utah Project, will deliver 60,000 acre-feet of water annually to Utah and Salt Lake counties. That is combined with the 13 percent to 17 percent savings residents have made during the drought, and continued conservation efforts that seek more than a 25 percent decrease in residential water use.

"I think we can get 25 percent. I think we can get more. But how much more is difficult to tell," said Larry Anderson, director of the Utah Department of Water Resources. "We've done the easy part. Now it gets harder."

The plan to finance both projects is solidifying. Based on the task force's current proposal, state revenues for the projects would be developed initially through the removal of a cap on the one-sixteenth of a cent allocation for water loan funds, plus by taking a percentage of the state's annual surplus.

Once in the actual construction phase, financing would shift to bonds. The water districts would foot their share of the bill through impact and connection fees, increased water rates and property taxes.

Though both projects remain far off, the task force will recommend up-front financing for environmental studies, and property and rights-of-way purchases to save money over the long run. That means financing proposals could be introduced to the Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Interim Committee as soon as this summer, and a bill could be offered up for the 2006 legislative session.

Anderson expressed hope of further fast-tracking the Bear River project by repealing current legislative language that calls for the project's water to be 70 percent sold before any work begins. But a river watchdog group calls that a bad idea.

"That 70 percent figure is a good government requirement," said Merritt Frey, executive director of the Utah Rivers Council. "This proposal would represent an end-run around that."