Man, oh man - - it's hard to keep up with the other communities included in the City of Waukesha's application for a precedent-setting diversion of Lake Michigan water.
Though the application is in the hands of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and will be there, I'm guessing, for a year - - get me a scorecard.
And so, apparently, add the Town of Delafield to the list, though as is true with the Town of Waukesha, I don't remember any action by local Delafield officials to opt into the application - - meaning not just the benefits (clean, abundant water) but also costs and responsibilities under state law and the Great Lakes Compact (a high-bar, demonstrated need, public input, conservation plans with demonstrated results, and so on).
The regional planning commission (SEWRPC) may be responsible for the application's shirttail relations, like Delafield, et al, because the planning agency produced a diverted water service delivery map required for Waukesha's application, but SEWERPC never held a hearing on which communities or whose residents thought who should receive the diverted water, its benefits and obligations/costs.
With the towns of Waukesha and Delafield not yet formally saying if they are in or out, and thus the extent of the application's water need being rather fluid, you wonder if the application was really ready for the DNR's review.
The agency's ruling after a year of Waukesha's tweaking and editing was "sufficiently complete."
You be the judge.
So I repeat another question I asked a while ago (related to issues now months and years old, as well) in a separate posting:
Is the City of Waukesha's application for permission to pipe in Lake Michigan water an effort to offer a new and improved water supply to its residents, or is it a plan to bring water to a larger region, stimulate growth there and also extend the City's presence outside its current borders - - and if it's both, will all eight Great Lakes governors agree to it?