[Vision2020] Sell-Outs: Senator Gary Schroeder and Moscow City Councilman Walter Steed

[Bill London]

P-
I disagree on both points

1. "we have control"
nope.  Hawkins will have control.  They will have the contractual right to 
(as I recall) 65 acre feet annually.  They can use that water or sell it or 
dump it in Paradise Creek.  Moscow must supply that amount by contract.  If 
the aquifer drops and we are rationing water or whatever, they are first in 
line.  Maybe they will be nice and sell it back to us.

2. "we make money"
nope. The latest I heard was Moscow will get less than $10,000 per year, 
total from the Hawkins deal. And the reality is that the loss of sales tax 
and property tax revenue from the movement of business across the state line 
will much more than offset that meager amount. And if their use, or other 
growth, requires Moscow to drill deeper, we all pay for Hawkins 
water --again --because of those huge capital costs.

BL








----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Rumelhart" <godshatter at yahoo.com>
To: <garrettmc at verizon.net>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>; <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Sell-Outs: Senator Gary Schroeder and Moscow City 
Councilman Walter Steed


> Garrett,
>
> I sympathize with your argument, but what about the argument "the
> aquifer knows nothing about State boundaries"?  If we go ahead and sell
> to Hawkins, we at least get some control over use through global rate
> hikes and whatnot.  If we don't, then we'll have no control at all and
> incidentally no revenue from it.  If there was a concrete wall
> underground that covers the width of the aquifer along the Idaho border,
> and all the water was on our side of it, then I'd be on your side on
> this one.  As it is, I think we have to make the best of an unfavorable
> situation.
>
> Paul
>
> Garrett Clevenger wrote:
>> Donovan writes:
>>
>> "I can say the Hawkins would get water rights because Moscow has no basis 
>> to deny water. What possible LEGAL reason could Moscow say or claim not 
>> to give water?... Moscow has no defense whatsoever to deny a shopping 
>> center water."
>>
>>
>> I don't claim to be a lawyer, but I would say that one legal reason is 
>> because Moscow does not have to sell water to Hawkins. There is no law 
>> saying Idaho cities must provide water out of state. Schroeder and 
>> Steed's law may make it easier for cities to sell water out of state, but 
>> that does not mean they are obligated to. That still needs approval from 
>> Idaho authorities.
>>
>> One job of government is to protect its interests. I'd say our city or 
>> state would not be doing its job if it just let people do whatever they 
>> want, whenever they want, with any resource they want.
>>
>> Washington did not pay to build Moscow's water infrastructure. They don't 
>> own it and cannot claim to have the right to the water that flows through 
>> those pipes. They can request that the city sell them water, but Moscow 
>> has the right to deny that.
>>
>> Moscow is not obligated to provide water to any development that is 
>> built. There is a process that has to be met before Moscow will sell 
>> water.
>>
>>
>> Donovan asks:
>>
>> "Can I write a petition for Moscow residents to deny you water rights, 
>> just because I don't want another farm in Moscow, or I THINK that your 
>> farm might use too much water and drain our limited supply?"
>>
>>
>> The answer is yes, if I'm applying for new water rights and you think 
>> it'll negatively affect your water, then you can petition and may be 
>> successful if you have evidence in your favor.
>>
>> Part of the process is opening it up to the public, and people can 
>> petition to block transfer of water. If someone gaining access to water 
>> is going to negatively affect someone already in the system, that person 
>> has a right to prevent being affected.
>>
>> If Hawkins is going to affect other users, of course those users have a 
>> right to petition. Evidence is presented, and if it looks like the new 
>> user will affect the old user, water rights to the new user can be 
>> denied. That is the legal process.
>>
>> Steed and the new council circumvented the legal process. They agreed to 
>> never petition transfer of water rights to Hawkins. They may have thought 
>> they had no case to block Hawkins, or they may just want to grow at any 
>> cost, but that does not mean there was no case. We won't ever know if 
>> they would have been successful in denying Hawkins their water rights 
>> because that case was never presented to Washington's Pollution Control 
>> Board.
>>
>> The difference between you wanting Hawkins and thus not wanting anything 
>> to get in the way, and me not wanting Hawkins, and wanting to process to 
>> unfold in the way it was going before the new council signed a secret 
>> agreement with Hawkins, is that you think its acceptable to have things 
>> done in secret by people with obvious conflicts of interest, while I want 
>> transparency and people with conflicts of interest to recuse themselves 
>> from signing secret deals and from writing laws that will affect the rest 
>> of the state.
>>
>> I want to make sure irresponsible developments don't occur, whereas you 
>> seem to think a free-for-all is acceptable.
>>
>> Do you not understand that government has the right to prevent things 
>> that go against its interests, or do we agree that that right exists?
>>
>> gclev
>>
>> =======================================================
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>                http://www.fsr.net
>>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>>
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
>