Governor Makes Water A Priority
Governor Locke listed water rights as one of his three most important issues to be addressed in his second term during his acceptance speech on election night.
He appears ready to deliver on that promise by hiring Jim Waldo a Tacoma attorney to lead his effort to move a 3 to 4 year water agenda through the legislature. Waldo is known by all those who have participated in water rights issues over the past several years. It was Waldo who attempted to save the Governor’s Extinction is Not An Option bill during the 1999 legislative session. Waldo has also participated in a host of other water rights negotiations over the years.
Waldo introduced the Governor’s water plan during a hearing of the Senate Environment, Energy & Water Committee in mid January. Accompanying Waldo was Ecology Director Tom Fitzsimmons and Curt Smitch, the Governor’s Special Assistant for Natural Resources. During his hour long presentation, Waldo explained how the Governor was going to break the needs of water users into manageable pieces that he would advance over a period of three to four years.
The first year the Legislature is being asked to pass a bill that would address two lines for processing water rights changes and transfers, fix the conservancy board problem, create a new category of certified water rights examiners, amend the family farm water act, and provide more funds for watershed planning.
The manner in which Waldo made the presentation and the perception that he would be taking the lead in pressing the Governor’s plan seemed to many a refreshing change from the past years’ antagonistic legislative negotiations and battles. Since that mid January presentation the hoped for change in dealing with water issues has pretty well evaporated. It appears that Fitzsimmons and crew are still creating the bill language pressing the Governor’s agenda. Waldo appears to be a go-between who’s purpose is to try to keep water users talking.
Water Bill Dropped
On February 1st Governor’s Locke’s first water bill was dropped in both the Senate and the House. The Senate bill is SB 5869 and in the House it is HB 1832. Rather than putting forth several bills addressing segments of his first year agenda he put them all in one bill. A practice that failed two years ago when Ecology ran an all inclusive water rights administration bill.
Municipal Water Not on This Year’s List
The five items to be addressed by this first installment are all items that tend to help agriculture more than municipal needs. Two lines and conservancy boards will help some purveyors, the family farm water act changes will help a few systems, but all-in-all, this years bill ignores municipal needs. In a multitude of meetings with Jim Waldo and other members of the Administration various groups of municipal purveyors have argued the need to address muni water rights, specifically the Growing Communities Doctrine language, this year. Each time Waldo has stressed that muni water issues are being reserved for the second and third year of the Governor’s water agenda. He also indicated that Governor Locke will not sign a muni water bill if it arrives on his desk.
Cities and PUDs go Forward with Muni Water Bills
Staff of the Association of Washington Cities received a lot of criticism during the past year for their Association’s lack of support or effort addressing the multitude of municipal water issues. Eastern Washington cities made it very clear at a meeting in September, held in Wenatchee, that they expect their Association to pass the Growing Communities Doctrine language drafted by the Washington Water Utility Council (WWUC) this year.
There are also some Public Utility Districts in Western Washington determined to introduce and pass muni water bills. Both groups seem to disregard the threat a Governor’s veto would pose.
During the first full week of February both Rep. Kelli Linville and Rep. Gary Chandler dropped muni water bills. Linville and Chandler are this sessions Co-Chairs of the House Agriculture and Environment Committee, the committee that deals with water rights issues.
Linville’s several bills include one that is a straight municipal water conservation bill, and another that is a combination of the WWUC Growing Communities Doctrine and new water conservation language. Chandler’s bill is a straight Growing Communities Doctrine bill with no conservation language. They both will be given a hearing in their committee during the next couple weeks. Whether they will be voted out of the committee is another question. House rules for this legislature differ from the rules that governed how business was conducted in the House during the past legislature, which was also a 50-50 split. Last year it took the approval of both co-chairs to hold a hearing on a bill. This session either co-chair can schedule a hearing but it will take the approval of both co-chairs to bring a bill up for a vote in executive session. Therefore, there is doubt that many water bills will move out of the House committee.
So What Happens
It appears that at the end of the first week of February that most groups of people interested in water are unhappy with the Governor’s bill. Ag, environmentalists, business, andeven most muni’s are displeased with the bill. It will be very difficult for the Governor to move his bill. If it does get to his desk it will not look like the bill that was introduced.
The other muni bills have even less chance of getting through the legislature this year. Either a bill is considered too “green” or not “green enough” and so will not be able to move. Even if a few manage to get out of the house of origin they stand very little success getting passed out of the other house.
The Washington Association of Sewer and Water Districts was not supportive of a muni bill this session due to the lack of support from the Governor. Most districts are concerned that a muni bill that would provide the changes we believe is necessary to help municipal purveyors if vetoed by the Governor would be used by Ecology attorneys in cases brought before the Supreme Court.
Twice in the past 3 or 4 years the Court has used a Governor’s veto of a water bill as legislative intent and issued decisions that we will pay for for a long time.
What About the George T. Rulemaking?
In discussion with Jim Waldo regarding the Governor’s desire to wait until next year or the year following to address muni issues it has been pointed out that the Ecology rulemaking is going to do great harm. It will also make it difficult if not impossible for purveyors to negotiate in good faith with the Governor over muni language when the Governor’s agency is actively overturning existing water rights certificates.
Waldo and Fitzsimmons both indicated that the rulemaking would be “tabled” during the next couple of years if purveyors negotiated in good faith.
We pointed out that even if Ecology “tables” the rulemaking they continue applying the concept or doctrine of George T. on each water system plan that comes to their agency for review. Even if the rulemaking is stopped or tabled we need for the continued attack on water rights to be terminated. Without such indication of good faith by the Administration how will we be able to believe the Governor or his representatives as we begin negotiating a muni bill?
This has been a lengthy explanation of what is occuring with water rights legislation. It is offered in an attempt to set the stage for what is probably going to be a very interesting session on water rights. Association members will be provided current information each week as the issue progresses. We will continue to provide similar information in this publication for non-members but it will not be as current.
If your district is interested in water rights issues we urge you to become a member, if you already are not one, and support this important issue.
Special Districts to Gather in Ocean Shores
The 2001 Spring Conference will be held on April 19 & 20 in the Ocean Shores Convention Center in Ocean Shores. The host hotel for this year’s conference will be the Ocean Shores Shilo Inn, the same hotel we used in 1997.
The agenda for the event will focus on issues such as the Health of Your District, a series of workshops looking at how the changing regulatory environment, changing needs of employees, and other events will require districts to look at doing business in a different way.
Water conservation is now a front burner issue with everyone interested in water. We have invited the Director of the Department of Health’s Drinking Water Division and the Executive Director of the Center for Environmental Law and Policy to discuss where they see conservation going in the years ahead.
There will be workshops addressing what we have learned since the ESA 4(d) rule has gone into effect and how one district is going to address the new TMDL restrictions being imposed on their wastewater stream.
For those who attended the fall conference in 1998 in Chelan we don’t need to explain who Gordon Graham is or what he does.
No one person can put as much information onto 1 page of a flip chart as does Gordon. His informative look at working with people is one of the most entertaining afternoons a person could have. Add to this mix good food, nice accommodations, and a beach to walk and Spring Conference should be one everyone should plan on attending. Information on conference hotels can be found on the back page of this newsletter. Go to http://www.waswd.org for registration information
WASWD Committee Structure Being Reevaluated
As the Association has grown during the past 5 years so has the number of standing and special committees. 2001 finds the Association with over 17 committees. In addition, the role of many of the committees has changed to meet the changing needs of the members.
The Board of Directors approved the creation of a special committee to reevaluate the needs of the Association and determine if a smaller number of committees might be possible.
The “Committee Committee” met recently and made some preliminary changes reducing the number of committees to 13 or 14. They have recommended merging some of the various activities into one committee or splitting some committees into their separate activities and merging those segments into other committees.
The Committee Committee will be making a report to the Board of Directors soon. If the Board approves of the proposed changes the entire package will be sent to the Bylaws committee to draft the necessary amendments to the Bylaws. These proposed changes will then be presented to the membership at either the Spring or the Fall conference for consideration.
Reducing the number of committees will make it possible for a Board member to sit on each committee. It will also make for easier coordination between different activities. For example it has been proposed to put the Conference and Education committees together under a new title of Leadership development committee. The two committees would then be subcommittees doing their separate activities but with the knowledge and coordination of the larger committee.
Selecting Your Attorney
One of the workshops at the January Commissioners’ Workshop dealt with selecting an attorney to represent and guide the district. The impetus for this workshop came from the increasing number of instances where commissioners and managers have been give inadequate or wrong information regarding a proposed action of the Board or conduct of commissioners. A special purpose water / sewer district, as defined in RCW 57, is a municipal corporation. As such they must each comply with Title 57 as well as the other RCWs that govern how municipal corporations and their elected officials are to perform their duties.
The Association frequently receives calls from districts that find themselves in a serious violation of the RCWs or its board of commissioners are operating in an illegal manner. This could occur from not keeping up with changes in the code, using an attorney that does not understand the unique aspects of municipal law, or by ignoring the advice of qualified counsel.
While the issue is primarily found in small rural districts it is also a problem for larger urban districts as well. Quite often the situation develops from the best of intentions. Districts, hoping to keep their money in the local community, obtain their legal advice and counsel from a local general practice lawyer. As with engineering consultants, districts tend to select their attorney and continue with them for years. Over time the district grows and its legal issues grow but they do not reevaluate their attorney to determine if he or she is still appropriate to meet the district’s needs.
Whether large or small, each district must comply with the same laws related to open public meetings, contracting, rate setting, commissioner ethics, water rights, environmental rules and regulations, and so on. Because all these laws change rapidly it takes a specialized attorney, one familiar with specific aspects of the law, to keep up with all these changes.
Small districts will say, “we can’t afford to pay those high priced urban attorneys.” What many small districts have discovered is that in avoiding use of proper counsel they end up spending far more later to correct problems that should never have occurred.
Many districts have contacted the association over the past few years seeking advice on how to find an attorney who can help them now that they have a significant legal problem. The Association can refer districts to those firms and individuals who are members of the Association.