Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Predictable Journal Sentinel Water Editorial Leaks Content

The Journal Sentinel editorial board has again weighed in with support for Waukesha's Great Lakes water diversion application.

Nothing really new in this iteration, though it minimizes the complication that Waukesha built into its application by adding portions of four neighboring municipalities to the projected water delivery area beyond the Waukesha City limits.

For one thing, the eight-state Great Lakes Compact governing all such diversion requests  says a community obtaining a diversion shall have public participation processes and effective conservation measures in place as a condition of approval.

The Waukesha neighbors have not filed a semi-colon in support of that requirement. No one knows what water-related measures they have on their books, and how effective they might be.

But bet the farm that if this application is moved on by the Wisconsin DNR to the seven other Great Lakes states, someone in Michigan or New York or elsewhere is going to ask for that information, and withholding it as has been done with Milwaukee is guaranteed to sink the application.

All it takes is one state to say "no,"and the application is rejected.
Additionally, Milwaukee has said since 2008 - - in writing, by Common Council resolution - - that any municipality seeking a sale of Lake Michigan water must demonstrate that it has programs in place that guarantee transit, housing and job opportunities for Milwaukee residents.

Transit connecting Milwaukee and the Town of Delafield? Affordable housing in Genesee?

No wonder the smaller communities that have agreed so far to be in the application - - the City of Pewaukee, and the Towns of Delafield and Genesee - have yet to forward the information Milwaukee has requested.

Curiously, the City of Waukesha has not gotten its client communities to cooperate.

This is where the Journal Sentinel could have toughened its editorial.

Lost opportunity.

So it goes.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

At this point, a state doesn't need to say "No" to block it.

All that is needed is for a state to say "We're researching this and we will likely have some questions"

The time delay will also have the same effect as killing the diversion without the need to say "No" and look like the bad guys.