Stealth Lake Powell Pipeline and Bear River Water projects

SB 80 Billions for Pork Water Projects! The horrendous price we pay for green lawns along the Wasatch. 1. Two billion dollars ($5 million THIS year) is the cost for proposed Bear River diversion. 2. It would also divert 20% of the vital water flow to the Great Salt, lowering the level of the lake. It would divert 220,000 acre-feet of water out of the Bear River. 3. It would also destroy massive sections of Utah wetlands, impacting millions of migratory birds. Birds from over 230 species from as far south as Chile, north to the Arctic Circle and as far west as Siberia. Many species gather at the lake in larger populations than anywhere else on the planet.

Guess who is paying for the lobbying to get this damage done? YOU. Both the Jordan Valley Water District and the Weber Basin Water District hired lobbyists to push the $5 million construction fund in the 2015 Legislative Session.

All this damage, in order to provide more municipal water to the Wasatch Front, most of which will be used to water lawns. Let’s adopt Las Vegas water regulations and meter all water use. That would make this unnecessary. Love, love, love‪#‎UtahRiversCouncil  LINK Photo credit Kent Budge.

IMG_5143This photo from my iPhone

My name is Dennis Gwyther and I am the webmaster, Cruise Chair and a GSLYC Board member. I attended the Meeting at DNR on February 11th, 2016 at 1:00pm. Shortly after 2 they started the discussion in the Lake Powell Pipeline. There were 27 people lined up to speak in opposition. I missed the first 2 but was able to use my iPhone to record the remaining 25. The links are below for those who would like to listen but couldn’t attend. I was seated between Ron Rowley and Clark Forman also members of the GSLYC Board.

SPEAKER 1 (unknown)

Speaker 2 (Gale)

Speaker 3 (???, professor at University of Utah)

Speaker 4 (citizen at request of Utah Rivers Council on behalf of self)

Speaker 5 (Rebecca, representing herself)

Speaker 6 (Amy, representing herself)

Speaker 7 (Paul Fisher, From Pleasant Grove representing himself)

Speaker 8 (Marsha, representing herself)

Speaker 9 (Nick, Conservation Director for Utah Rivers Council)

Speaker 10 (Kirk, representing Western Wildlife Conservancy)

Speaker 11 (Gordon, Research Director at Utah Rivers Council)

Speaker 12 (Tom, From St. George)

Speaker 13 (R. Jefre Hicks, representing Utah Air Boat Association)

Speaker 14 (Martha, Shareholder Leeds Water Users Association)

Speaker 15 (Greg, taxpayer from Ivins, UT)

Speaker 16 (Lynn de Freitas, Executive Director of Friends Of Great Salt Lake)

Speaker 17 (Lynn, from Ogden, UT)

Speaker 18 (Eric, Executive Director of Glen Canyon Institute)

Speaker 19 (??, Great Salt Lake Audubon)

Speaker 20 (Lisa, Southern Utah Resident)

Speaker 21 (Steve, Toxic Waste Consultant)  BOARD TRIED TO LIMIT TIME AND GOT BIG BOOS FROM CROWD

Speaker 22 (James, Landscape Architect in St. George)

Speaker 23 (Dave, Utah Citizens Council)

Speaker 24 (Paul Van Dam, St. George, UT) (former SL County District attorney and Attorney General of the State)**VERY GOOD**

Speaker 25 (Berl, taxpayer from St. George, UT)






The Salt Lake Tribune

Bill advancing to transfer money from roads to water projects
By LEE DAVIDSON | The Salt Lake Tribune connect
First Published Feb 11 2016 04:30PM • Last Updated Feb 11 2016 10:24 pm
Controversy » Several senators raise concerns over delayed road projects, much-criticized Lake Powell pipeline.

The Senate gave preliminary approval Thursday to a bill that could transfer nearly a half-billion dollars from transportation to water projects over the next 11 years — including possibly for the controversial Lake Powell Pipeline.

It voted 19-10 to send SB80 to a final vote later. It would shift a 1/16th sales tax now earmarked for large transportation projects to water projects.

Sen. Stuart Adams, R-Layton, the bill’s sponsor, said the money would be put into a restricted account and gain interest for future water projects needed to supply the state’s growing population.

He said the bill would “make time our friend instead of our enemy” by allowing a large pot of money to grow with interest. “This is great fiscal management.” He said money from it could not be released for any project without a vote of the Legislature.

While he and others said the money isn’t necessarily being set aside for an expensive pipeline from Lake Powell to the St. George area, much of the debate focused on that potential controversial use — which environmental groups oppose, calling for better conservation instead.

Sen. Steve Urquhart, R-St. George, said, “Obviously, one of the projects I would like to see funded is Washington County. We’re not criminals for wanting our water to be developed. We have had the growth.”

He said, “It’s not realistic to expect a small community to front $1.3 billion, maybe it will get up to $2 billion” for the Lake Powell Pipeline. He said the area would repay it.

But Sen. Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan, complained that many areas that would benefit from the pipeline now have some of the cheapest water rates in the state. He said they should raise them first and build up funds for such projects before approaching the state for expensive help.

He also worries about the money that would be diverted from roads. The Utah Department of Transportation estimated this month that the bill would divert $472.6 billion from its projects over an 11-year period.

It released a list of projects that could delay, including such things as continuing work to convert Bangerter Highway into a freeway, completion of the Mountain View Corridor freeway and construction of the proposed West Davis Corridor freeway in Davis and Weber counties.

Hillyard worried it could delay a needed project on State Road 30 between Logan and Tremonton. Sen. Karen Mayne, D-West Valley City, wondered about completion of the Mountain View Corridor, and said that transportation — like water — is needed for Utah’s future.

“What are we going to do for transportation?” Mayne asked. “Are we starving one child for another child? I don’t know.”

Sen. Wayne Harper, R-Taylorsville, said the bill would force the state to borrow through bonding for key transportation projects now clearly identified in long-range plans, while it would save for vague, yet-to-be defined water projects.

He also noted that Gov. Gary Herbert has also proposed to shift a similar amount from transportation to education — so lawmakers should carefully consider priorities.



share on facebook

Recent Posts

Recent Comments