1/18/2009 11:14:00 PM Talk of the Town: Municipalities will stand up to SRP
By JACK WILSON and HARVEY SKOOG Special to the Courier
The Salt River Project (SRP) has decided it doesn't like the rules, then the rules simply do not apply to it.
It clearly demonstrated that mindset clearly demonstrated this week when it filed a five-count complaint against the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR), the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings and the City of Prescott.
SRP's lawsuit is a blatant attempt to circumvent the administrative process of a state agency. SRP's actions, although not unexpected, are yet another attempt to undermine Prescott and Prescott Valley's right to transport water from the Big Chino Sub-basin.
In November, ADWR approved Prescott and Prescott Valley's use of approximately 8,000 acre feet of water from the Big Chino Sub-basin, over SRP's objections. ADWR also ruled that SRP has no standing in this review - no legal right to participate - because it does not reside in the Prescott Active Management Area (PrAMA).
Rather than following the proper appeals process within ADWR, SRP has chosen to file a lawsuit in Maricopa County challenging the constitutionality of the 18 year-old state law that gave our communities' the right to this water supply. This is because SRP is a Phoenix-based entity that is using its deep pockets and political clout to contest our water rights.
We are not surprised by this disingenuous tactic because SRP never has shown it is willing work with our communities in good faith.
Prescott, Prescott Valley and Chino Valley participated in nearly six months of negotiations with SRP to resolve our differences of opinion, discussed mitigation strategies and tactics with SRP and invested hundreds of hours in good faith negotiations. These negotiations fell apart, however, after SRP continually balked and threatened legal action. It was clear it had no intention to come to a consensus.
In December, after ADWR's favorable decision, SRP was among several groups outside the PrAMA that filed notices of appeal - despite a lack of standing. To circumvent the legal prohibition against non-resident participation in the administrative proceeding, SRP recruited residents within the PrAMA to act as surrogates by filing identical objections using the exact same lawyers that are working for SRP.
Now SRP wants to have it both ways - participate in the administrative process using surrogates, and file a lawsuit in Maricopa County superior court to stop the proceedings and declare the underlying law giving Prescott its rights unconstitutional.
Arizona law is clear that Big Chino Sub-basin groundwater is not surface water. In spite of its claims otherwise, SRP is not entitled to this water supply, now or in the future. ADWR, Prescott and Prescott Valley are proceeding transparently and appropriately through the proper administrative channels. SRP, however, is playing by its own set of rules.
It's also clear that SRP has no desire to let ADWR fully and properly review this matter and bring it to its conclusion. In effect, SRP wants to change the rules in the middle of the game. But we are confident the law is on our side and we will focus our legal efforts accordingly.
We look forward to bringing the process back to where it belongs: working with all parties involved under the appropriate ADWR administrative review to pursue our goal of achieving a safe-yield water supply that will sustain our communities, while protecting the Verde River and its surrounding environment.
Posted: Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Article comment by:
William Wallace
Dear Cry me a river,
It is government control of the water supply that has lead to this ongoing conflict, and even to the current threat to the Verde River.
Because water changed from a private property right, to a community resource under the ground water act, the ADWR are empowered to take the water from the ones that are using it and allocate it to someone else. The ADWR are empowered to zero out water rights. Most people believe that they serve as the water boy of the land barons.
The solution is very plain. It is wrong to take the water that someone is already using, and allocate it to someone else. Leave current use alone, First Use Principles should always be the foundation of water law. The whole reason for the ongoing instability is the effort of some to take the water that someone else is already using. This is justified by the ADWR by saying that it is in the best interest of the community, and water is a community resource. In my opinion if the ADWR is simply not allowed to take water rights from current users then their will be alot less conflict. Another little tid bit that many may not be aware of, is that when a water utility is owned in the private sector the Arizona Corporation Commission regulates their utility increases to all of the users. There are laws against raising the cost of the water too much or too often. When a municipality buys those water rights, there is no further regulation by the Arizona Corporation Commission applying to increasing the utility rates for water. If you lived in Prescott Valley back in the days that we paid our water bills to Shamrock they were owned by the Fain Family. Their rate increases were regulated by the Arizona Corporation Commission. My water bills were very low even though I gardened. Now that the Town of Prescott Valley owns those water rights, and they can charge whatever they desire, the water bills are high even for people that do not garden. Moreover now you are billed not only for the water that comes out of your faucets, but billed again for the same water as it goes down your drain. And God help your if you try to recycle your water, and you try to use it to water your garden. You are billed on both ends so that your town can sell the water that is going down your drain to a golf couse.
Crying, The answer is to simply respect first use priniples.
Posted: Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Article comment by:
For us or against us
The water goes to developers first. That is all you need to know about this plan.
Posted: Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Article comment by:
JonSE of Prescott
Mayor Wilson, whatever the legal merits of your arguments, and I suspect that SRP knows their water law, it stands apparent that most citizens of Prescott do not approve of your and the council's expenditures on a project which is designed to benefit large land owners and developers but be paid for by the ordinary taxpaying residents, most of whom are not going to benefit from the long-term tax and fee burden you are so blithely placing upon them, their children, and grandchildren.
I surely expect that your paltering and intransigence on this matter will be your political demise in this community.
Posted: Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Article comment by:
cry me a river
I pray that it wasn't a PR team that came up with that. I could tell everyone what they already know for 100 bucks. What has me stumped is where SRP was able to find all the professional whiners and snivlers. Keep it up, a river of tears may be just the mitigation plan we need. I should warn you though, by wailing in unison you are starting to drown each other out. So much noise with nothing constructive to say. Offer a cheaper solution to assuring water for my children and theirs. Share some ideas of what a feasible mitigation plan might look like so the rest of us know what you are talking about. The comments may be shortsighted but they do offer a simple solution. Nobody do anything, don't worry about anything, and if we all just ignore the future it will never come. I'm no genius but can understand why there is a need to secure water for the future. I sure as heck don't want to have to move to phoenix to get a drink of water. Let's think about the people who are not even living yet. Even with the predictions of doom I am confident they will still find benefit from this water 100 years from now. I love the river. It would be nice for everyone involved if it is still around 100 years from now. It would be nice if I was too. I can try to hold my breath and hope, but I still gotta have water to drink.
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
Rancher up north
Expensive rhetoric from a couple of men who don't seem to give a squat about the extensive damage they will do. I don't trust livestock rustlers, human traffickers, sex offenders, narcotics smugglers, meth addicts, poker cheats, or water thieves....
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
Vote Them Out!
Here we go again. The spokesmen for the Land Barons and Developers! Good Lord folks, throw these lapdogs out of office. The Good Ole Boys have enough money, and the California Mafia should fold their tents and leave our river and towns alone!
Please VOTE this election and throw as many pro pipeline ladogs out of office. It is the time.
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
Possible Plagiarism?
Gee George S., I usually agree with your point of veiw, but do you really think these two Mayors actually sat down together and wrote this letter? It is surely the work of their PR firm. I would assume the "honorable" mayors simply attached their names to it. Just a guess...
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
More PR Bull
Excuse me, the only parties that have a right to input in the process are those that have the most to benefit?Well no wonder you both agree with the process. SRP should file suit and the people of Paulden should be included. Clearly, there is something very, very, wrong with a law that does not allow those that stand to lose the most have absolutely no right to be included in the process. Funny thing, Mr. Mayors, you sure don't like it when things don't get your way, do you? That's where your transparency starts to disintegrate. The negotiations fell apart with SRP because PV and Prescott steadfastly refuse to put together a REAL mitagation plan. Only a fool would believe watching the aquifer levels decline is a mitigation measure. And we don't want your sewer water poisoning our wells either! Even Herb Guenther, director of ADWR, believes the massive pumping of the Big Chino will eventually dry up the Verde AND all the private wells in Paulden. You are strong-arming and forcing Paulden residents to give up huge easements to build a pipeline none of the Paulden residents will ever be able to benefit from. Without a doubt your pumping will eventually start drawing down the wells and not one single resident in Paulden will be able to hook onto to your pipeline. Do you think that might generate a massive lawsuit too? None of you city officials have EVER given any thought whatsoever to the people of Paulden. The towns have already drawn down the Little Chino aquifer and Chino Valley wells are starting to suffer. The Big Chino will most certainly be next, if you get your way. It's
just a matter of time. The response to mining groundwater was not to be conservative but to encourage wild growth, even to the point of giving away millions upon millions of dollars to private development. Prescott and PV have without a doubt proven to be completely irresponsible, arrogant, and disingenuous. Mayors Wilson and Skoog, your letter only serves to further reinforce this. Or was the letter really written by your PR firm and you two just put your names on it? It is clear that as long as you two and your cronies are in office you are determined to win at all costs, up to the point of bankrupting your towns. All for the benefit of your development buddies. Your citizens are angry and want to preserve the small town atmosphere. Why you are all so intent on making sure you completely ruin this area is beyond me. Oh, by the way, have you conveniently forgotten, SRP is not the only party against you. There is a long line of parties that don't want you to build your precious pipeline, including your own citizens.
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
Chuck Bordenave
When I read this piece, I was flushed with anger. Mr. Seaman, you expressed my view almost exactly, except that how do you know the PR company,spin doctors, hired at a cost of almost $155,000 not $130,000, didn't write this and just put Wilson and Skoog's names on it. I believe that it is probably the case!!!
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
SRP trying to save the Verde? Ha! look what they've done to the Salt...
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
George Seaman
Jack, I was going to write a rebuttal to almost every point you have made in this little PR piece but what a waste of my time that would be! Everything you claim in this article is at least a stretch of the truth, and you know it now as well as you knew it when you were elected to office. It is stunning that you would make these claims and try to mislead the citizens of your city in the process! So far the Big Chino Water Mine has cost the municipalities more than $500,000 in legal fees and the process has barely gotten started, during your campaign you warned the voters about these ridiculous legal costs and now for some reason you think that the advise of the city's 'legal team' actually makes sense? Of course they want you to think that you are in the right, it will only drag on these legal arguments for years and the ONLY people who will profit from it are your lawyers! I would encourage you to stop writing your misguided propaganda pieces, you are already spending $130,000 (of taxpayer money) for a PR firm that is supposed to do them for you!
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
P.O.'d in Paulden
Hey Jack and Harvey, stop sniveling ! You don't like being bullied ? Well neither do those of us adversely affected by your pipeline. Put your money where your mouth is and prepare for a costly battle ! If I read the majority of comments correctly, you will not be in office anymore when this reaches it's eventual outcome. "Freedom lies in being bold"-Robert Frost
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
What mitigation?
What were those mitigation strategies? I can't recall a single one. The municipalities have stonewalled on that one!
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
Tom Steele
Don't spend a lot of money on this; Harvey and Jack. It's our tax dollars AND the water is for developers. As a cost of bringing water to our area, legal expenses are a part of the costs. Will all the legal costs be assessed to developer fees? They better! I am tired of "We the People" swallowing the costs of roads, infrastructure, schools and larger government services AND NOW WATER!
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
The Verde
Mayor Wilson, we voted for you because we thought you were working in the interests of the Verde River, and not in the pockets of developers. SRP is trying to protect it's water rights, which stem from springs fed by the Big Chino sub basin. The law that fails to link groundwater with surface water is outdated in terms of this discussion, and needs to be changed. It has become perilously clear that any withdrawl of Big Chino water will affect the Verde's Flow. Any effort do draw water from this source, is at the river's peril, and ignores the many rewards that water conservation in our town will achieve. If we put the Big Chino pipeline funds toward conservation, in the form of rainwater catchment and conservation, the pipeline would not be needed. I expected this outlook from Harvey Skoog, but not you.
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
Joe Consumer
Isn't it interesting how government employees are so anxious to file lawsuits WHEN THEY ARE USING OUR MONEY TO PAY THE LAWYERS? I'm thinking there should be a way to remedy this, like allowing a very small group of private attorneys to express an opinion on the merits of initiating a major wealth transfer from the taxpayers to lawyers for a suit that may have no prospect of success?
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
Harold
Oh, let's see... a downstream water rights holder is being barred from the process of protecting its rights, it sues, and it's being disingenuous??? What about the YEARS the city has publicly stated it won't harm the Verde River, yet refuses to provide one iota of protection?! I'm all for those with rights to water upholding those rights. Unfortunately, Prescott was granted some exclusive backroom deal to water it has no business stealing... Instead of playing the victim, COP/PV, why not fess up to the real water barons you are? SRP has rights to the Verde - Big Time. Prescott not only wants to take water from the big guys, they want to steal water from the little guys (Paulden) as well! Time to reign it in, get real with your citizens, and offer something besides B.S. to protect the water resources and environment in the region. And good luck.
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
BluePencilWoman
Um -- I've only read the first 2 grafs, but maybe you ought to get an editor on this before you go live with it. Cheers, no charge again...
