Facts and chatter about Waukesha, water & DNR activity

There is movement on Waukesha's precedent-setting proposal to divert water from Lake Michigan.

*  Fact: The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has announced it is within weeks or releasing information about its lengthy review of Waukesha's diversion paperwork. 

When the release of information takes place, a comment period clock will begin and public hearings will be held, too. 

Presumably, the DNR will say it finds that Waukesha's application meets the standards for diversions allowed outside of the boundaries of the Great Lakes basin by a 2008, multi-state, US and Canadian water management compact.

And the agency will probably say is satisfied that Waukesha has properly evaluated all possible and reasonable alternatives to its preferred option - - the inflow water supply pipe from Oak Creek's water utility to Waukesha and what may be the more controversial portion of the application - - the disposal of the water as treated wastewater into the Root River at a site in Franklin to flow through Racine and into its lake harbor.

So comments would focus on those two pieces of the diversion plan, as well as on the plan's cost, environmental impacts, and so on.

*  Fact: All eight US Great Lakes states must unanimously approve such an application - - a single "no" vote stalls it for adjustments or perhaps kills it - - so a final determination not just by the WI DNR but by all the other states is still a long way off, and is not guaranteed. If the DNR moves the application to the other states for the review, the DNR has to sell the application's legitimacy.

* Fact: Canadian provincial officials and First Nations (with status similar to sovereign US Native American tribes) in Canada can play an advisory, consulting role under the 2008 agreement but have no vote or veto over a plan submitted by a US state.

Expect the states to listen carefully to that advice, as the Great Lakes belong to both countries and Canadian public opinion and officials' positions on these issues cannot be taken for granted, as some have already said.

*  Chatter: Walker's office is said to have let the DNR know the boss wanted the agency to get the ball rolling. That would make sense, since the DNR's former powerful DNR Deputy Secretary, Atty. Matt Moroney, is now a special adviser in the Governor's office.

And the longer the process goes, the more it could become an issue for Walker as his presidential campaign proceeds. Since some of the diverted water would go to fuel sprawl development, does Walker want to be seen promoting a precedent-setting water-for-growth plan while other portions of the country deal with precedent-setting drought?

* Chatter: Diversion supporters are counting on solid support among other conservative Great Lakes GOP Governors, like Michigan's Snyder, Indiana's Pence and Ohio's Kasich, but who says  New York's Democratic Gov. Cuomo or Minnesota's Dayton wouldn't play the same game?

Then this little story bubbling up Tuesday about Waukesha now designating it's slow-motion water planning a crisis and doing something about in Washington, DC:

Later today, Daniel Duchniak, the city's water utility general manager, is heading to Washington, D.C. to talk about a proposal to tap into Lake Michigan.

Some background about the whole delayed application process, here.

Chatter: Presumably, this DC trip - - not the advocates' first - - was in pursuit of a huge earmark Waukesha has been talking about for years to bail the city and its water utility out of some portion of the diversion expense, now having ballooned past $200 million, given the more expensive routing of water from Oak Creek that Waukesha finally chose.

It's beyond me how the County seat of one of the richest, and reddest counties around, and in a state where the government is all about cutting spending and killing off entitlements would expect this kind of a handout.