|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
7/3/2006
New Berlin Water Diversion Try Shows Problems Ahead
By James Rowen
The column below reflects the views of the author, and these opinions are neither endorsed nor supported by WisOpinion.com.
By James Rowen
MILWAUKEE -- While reams of copy and hours of meetings have been
devoted to whether the City of Waukesha would -- or
should -- apply for a controversial diversion of water
from Lake Michigan, the City of New Berlin has,
without fanfare, sent an application for diversion
permission of its own to the Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources.
Almost as quietly, Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm refused to even consider the request, showing
the easiest solution to Waukesha's water woes faces big hurdles.
New Berlin currently buys City of Milwaukee water for
eastern New Berlin; the diversion sought would extend
Lake Michigan water to New Berlin's western portion
outside the Great Lakes basin on the western side of
the subcontinental divide.
The March 28th New Berlin application says the city
would need 1.875 million diverted gallons per day this
year for customers in its western portion, rising to
2.480 million gallons daily by 2050.
Prepared for New Berlin by the Waukesha-based
consulting firm Ruekert-Mielke, the application was
reviewed by the DNR, where Scott Hassett, the DNR
secretary, then forwarded as "complete" to the other
seven U.S. Great Lakes states for their review, records
show.
Diversions are governed by a U.S.-Canadian compact that
has been in place since 1985 and is in the first
stages of being amended.
All eight Great Lakes US states would have had to give
their approval to New Berlin's application, and the
two Canadian provinces bordering Great Lakes would
have had to be consulted, before water were to flow for
use in western New Berlin.
Laws and procedures governing such diversions in the
compact had been under review for four years by the
Great Lakes states and provinces since 2001, but none
have adopted the proposed changes.
In part because those changes have not yet been
approved, New Berlin's application ran into immediate
opposition from Michigan, where concern
about diversions of water out of the Great Lakes basin
is always a hot topic.
Granholm said in a statement Wednesday that while she has forwarded the
New Berlin application to appropriate Michigan
officials for their review, she "would not consider
the application for diversion."
That effectively puts New Berlin's application in
legal limbo and dead in the water.
Granholm cited existing Michigan law and the fact that
no Great Lakes state had yet to pass legislation to
implement the pending procedure and law changes
covering diversions.
That process could take up to 10 years, observers
generally believe.
New Berlin Mayor Jack Chiovatero said Friday that he knew the diversion application was a
long shot, calling it "a test case" that he had hoped
might get favorable treatment from the states.
Chiovatero said his community faced an expensive
federal requirement to provide drinking water with its
naturally-occurring radium removed.
The New Berlin application took a number of Wisconsin
environmental organizations by surprise, in part
because the Wisconsin Legislature has created a study
committee that is expected to take much of 2007 to
recommend how the new diversion procedures should be
incorporated into Wisconsin law.
In the past, Wisconsin has been a leader in water
conservation and management.
Curiously, there was no public disclosure of the New
Berlin application by Wisconsin officials while they
reviewed it and then sent it to the other states:
Michigan officials, however, immediately disclosed the
application's existence because their laws require
such disclosure.
Though the City of Milwaukee would be the most likely
source for diverted water to New Berlin because it
already sends water for use in eastern New Berlin,
Milwaukee city officials were kept in the dark about
the application until mid-week.
There is another transparency issue related to the
application: While Ruekert-Mielke has been under
contract to New Berlin since 2003 for water issues
that include possible diversions, the firm is also the
consultant to the Southeastern Regional Planning
Commission (SEWRPC) for that body's high-profile
comprehensive regional water study.
The SEWRPC study will review and make recommendations
on several regional water supply options, including
diversions of Lake Michigan water, which could be the
study's most controversial issue.
The SEWRPC committee has only begun discussing
diversion criteria and guidelines in the most
preliminary fashion, with SEWRPC staff and the
consulting company framing the discussion.
Phil Evenson, the SEWRPC executive director, said in
an e-mail Friday that using the same consulting company
that prepared the New Berlin diversion application
would not bias the SEWRPC study.
"They have been retained as technical, not policy,
consultants to the commission," said
Evenson. "....because they serve many water utility
clients in the region, have a great deal of knowledge
about the existing water systems serving the region,
and have significant staff expertise."
Continued Evenson:
"R&M is not responsible for plan formulation and
policy determination. Our staff and the committee will
do that. As such, R&M is free to work with their
municipal clients in pursuing local objectives, such
as you cite in New Berlin."
--Rowen is a Milwaukee writer and consultant and former Milwaukee city official.
| |
|
|