Pine Strawberry Water Issues
Dec 6, 2008
There is a small group of dissenters who are opposed to the takeover of the water companies by PSWID. They do have the right to speak as we are still in the United States and have our First Amendment Rights of the Constitution. The unfortunate thing is that they have been telling untruths that seem to be right out of the mouth of Robert Hardcastle of Brooke Utilities. Whether they are receiving compensation for doing so is unproven at this time, maybe they are just confused or misled. Whatever, they have been very active in writing letters to the editors of the two Payson area newspapers and they are active in voicing their disapproval of most actions of the PSWID Board.
I took this comment from the PSWID website so that you can read it without my editorial input:
"Additionally, a layman's analysis of the report has been prepared and posted to the waterforpinestrawberry.com web site and questions have been subsequently posed to Economists.com by waterforpinestrawberry suggesting a number of errors and incorrect assumptions in the report. Both the questions and responses by Economists.com were copied to the District's email address and are public information. These questions and answers which address the suggestion of errors in the report can be downloaded for review and analysis by clicking here. "
This was a very comprehensive answer to those errors and I commend Economist.com for the excellent job they did in handling this. I have no idea if the dissedents even bothered to read it, much less absorb or accept it.
I will take this opportunity to try to explain some of the other mistakes they are voicing. I just read two very similar 'Letters to the Editor' in the Payson Roundup by two people that no one seems to know. The first question is why are they stating lies for facts? Namely that the PSWID plans to remove water from Strawberry to Pine to support developers. The truth is; that is what the K2 project was all about. The K2 agreement was written so that Pine Water Co. got first use of the water from it and any extra could then be sold to Strawberry Water Co. BUI claimed there was no water in Pine so it had to be located in Strawberry and then he could sell it from one of his companies to the other while the consumers paid for it twice.
PSWID's plan is to provide water for all customers equally so no one will have shortages. BUI has for many years pumped water out of wells in Strawberry to send to Pine but the naysayers claim PSWID wants to do that. Then last year BUI implemented the water stages in Strawberry so that they could begin to limit Strawberry as they have done in Pine for several years. The "developers" in Pine spent their own money to drill a deep well and prove that water is available while BUI would not take that risk without the taxpayers doing a pre-drill bail-out.
And BUI already owned property right next to the Milk Ranch well site where they could have drilled a well without having to pump it over the mountain from Strawberry. It just wasn't the way to make big bucks; selling to yourself, buying from other higher cost water sources, disposing of existing storage tanks all make for bigger profits.
Twice this year the voters have plainly stated by a huge majority that we have to change the water system ownership and control. It needs to be locally operated so that we can see and speak directly to the people making decisions. We need to keep the profit dollars in our community, California has more than enough money, they don't need ours any longer.
Phoenix's CityNorth deal ruled unlawful
In the Dec 24th Arizona Republic the following article seems to substantiate the stance by many members of our community that the K2 agreement with BUI was unconstitutional and PSWID should never have offered $300,000.00 of tax-payer's money to Brooke Utilities.
Appeals court overturns CityNorth deal
by Michael Clancy - Dec. 23, 2008 01:41 PM
The Arizona Republic A nearly $100 million agreement between Phoenix and the huge mixed-use development CityNorth has been overturned.
The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled today that the agreement violated the gift clause of the Arizona Constitution, which prohibits government entities from granting money or credit to private entities in most cases.
CityNorth, located at 56th Street and Loop 101, already has opened its first phase, which includes two blocks of shops, restaurants, offices and residential space. The court decision could affect the completion of the project.
The agreement is worth $97.4 million or half the sales taxes collected at CityNorth over 11 years, whichever came first. In exchange, the city got the developer to agree to free parking, 200 spaces for park-and-ride use, and a denser development expected to generate sales taxes above what normally could be anticipated.
No money has been exchanged under the agreement at this time. The agreement was scheduled to begin after the second phase of the development was completed, including three major department stores. Phase two currently is scheduled to open in November 2010.
The ruling was the result of a lawsuit filed by the Goldwater Institute challenging the agreement. A decision in Maricopa County Superior Court supported the agreement. The appeals court overruled the superior court.
Representatives of the Thomas J. Klutznick Co. declined interviews.
In a prepared statement, John Klutznick, a company vice president overseeing CityNorth, said the decision could affect future development.
"We are disappointed by the court's ruling today, and will assess both our legal and development options in the coming weeks," the statement said.
"The incentive agreement was designed to maximize tax revenue generated to the city and jobs created in the community. Without the agreement, we will be forced to pursue a less capital-intensive design for CityNorth, which will lessen the density of the project and unfortunately decrease benefits to the City in the process."
The decision could be appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court by either the city of Phoenix or CityNorth.
Clint Bolick of the Goldwater Institute, who argued the case on behalf of six city business owners, said he would ask the city "not to throw good money after bad" and drop the case.
I met a friend in Walmart yesterday whom I hadn't visited with in sometime so we spent about 30 minutes hashing over recent issues.One of the things we talked about was the semi-truck accident that happened Wed afternoon south of the natural bridge on hwy 87.She was unlucky enough to have been on the way home from work and was delayed for over two hours. She said the highway was closed for about 4 hours and everyone visited and there were no flare ups or anger displayed. She shared with me the few details she knew of the incident and thought that it would appear in the Payson Roundup Friday. It did not, and I am not surprised as they seldom cover any news outside the town limits unless it is real sensational or one of the locals has an inside with a reporter.
Something else we discussed was the Congress members in Washington voting themselves a raise in light of the economic condition our country is in. What is with these idiots? Don’t they realize they are killing the goose that lays their golden eggs? She suggested we need to join hands and throw them all out and start over. Unfortunately, nothing seems to unite the American public to stand up and make changes. Apathy abounds, people are complacent and think that everything is going to be better in a few days/weeks/months/years. Take your pick. America has always rebounded, but America has never gone through what it is going through now. And I don’t mean the depression. What we have now is widespread apathy, welfare, government waste and political correctness, mass murder of babies and soon we’ll see euthanasia of the elderly. The only way you can get Americans attention is to hold a sports event like the Super Bowl. Even then, they can’t agree.
A correction to my blog was posted by John Bittner, I owe the Rounup an apology it seems.
I read their on-line edition not the paper edition. Payson Roundup Paper of Friday Jan 16, 2009, Top story on page 2A is about this accident.
Go ahead, make my day! Make a comment!
Public Comments