Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Waukesha Water To Referendum? A Project That Expensive, And Controversial - - Why Not

Mayor Jeff Scrima's proposal strikes me as reasonable.

It would also help the potential selling communities, like Milwaukee, with guidance, and would clarify the community's intent for the other Great Lakes states, too.

1 comment:

Water Lily said...

From the JSOnline comments re this article. (These comments may be of interest as Water Lily debunks some typical ignorance on the subject.):

Distracted Housewife - Jun 07, 2011 5:19 PM

What's the referendum going to say? "Would you rather spend $160 million on a good idea that has been studied for 10 years or spend $300 million on a stupid idea that was made up a few months ago?" If so, go for it.

WaterLily - Jun 07, 2011 6:06 PM

Hel-LOOO distracted housewife! Attention please!
It's not $160 million, it's $164 million. And now the latest Water Utility press release says "$164 million - $197 million." Expect this number to keep creeping up, along with your Waukesha water utility rates, estimated to DOUBLE (at the very least) what you NOW pay. (And don't forget the 18% increase you got stuck with in 2006 and another 16% increase that followed right behind in 2008.)
Scrima's 'stupid idea' of using the quarries has been tried successfully in a nearby midwestern city, Burnsville MN. The only reason it's a 'new idea' here is because the water utility has only been looking at ONE idea for 10 years--the Lake Michigan diversion. Therefore they spent no money, time or effort studying real alternatives which are closer and therefore cheaper and may have given residents a real choice.
If you'd been 'studying' one thing for 10 years and someone new comes along and says "hey, what about this other idea?" would you freely admit your mistake, confess that your single solution was the plan all along, and own up to the $2 million dollars or more of public money you spent on selling your one, lousy idea to the people who have to pay for it? Including distracted housewives and other distracted people? Nah--you'd probably defend your original plan, discredit the person with the new idea, and magically estimate the new idea's cost at roughly triple your idea. (When you can't even give an accurate estimate of the plan you'd been working on for 10 years. REALLY ?!?)
That's the way the water droplet rolls in Waukesha.