The basic issue is whether Waukesha can raise rates, in part to pay for the Lake Michigan option, before any Lake Michigan water deal is struck and all eight Great Lakes states approve the diversion.
Separately, there a ton of political and procedural questions and hurdles, too.
More, here.
And here.
“One thing that we know is that Waukesha must obtain a new supply of water and any alternatives other than the Great Lakes option will be more expensive.”
ReplyDeletePerhaps clarification is needed to this statement from the utility manager. When I looked at the application online, it breaks out this way for capital cost in millions:
Deep and shallow aquifer $189
Shallow aquifer and riverbank inducement $184
Unconfined deep aquifer $226
Lake Michigan from Milwaukee
(Return via Underwood creek) $164
(Return via Root River) $184
(Return via Lake Michigan) $218
Lake Michigan from Oak Creek
(Return via Underwood creek) $261
(Return via Root River) $281
(Return via Lake Michigan) $315
Lake Michigan from Racine
(Return via Underwood creek) $312
(Return via Root River) $332
(Return via Lake Michigan) $425
There is the potential for possible federal funding and I do say potential, for Federal funding. But the application mentions that due to the climate in Washington one assumption includes $50m and the other assumes nothing.
Keep in mind that the application is based solely on the utilities supreme confidence that the application will be approved by all 8 states, and I might add, based on the rate request the plan moves forward in 2013. It almost seems that Waukesha is trying to force and pressure the issue with the Council of Great Lakes Governors.
Regardless, CUB has a great point. Waukesha Water Utility needs to respond to it without saying Lake Michigan is the only and most affordable future water supply without having a Great Lakes diversion approval in hand and a contract to purchase water from Milwaukee.