“We’re paying them $54,000 for nothing,” he said.
Diedrich said Griffin and Brown were right in the first place to suspect the City would have to pay the fee regardless of whether it wanted to or not.
Another problem Diedrich and Marchione had with the fee was that it was solely imposed on municipalities, meaning that unincorporated areas weren’t paying one cent for water, which is every person’s most basic necessity. Diedrich also pointed out that 80 to 90 percent of the state’s surface water is in unincorporated land.
The state claims the water fees are necessary to balance its budget, but Diedrich isn’t buying it.
“It’s the state’s way of covering the costs of groundwater,” he said. “In my opinion, that’s not balancing the budget.”
Diedrich said Griffin and Brown were right in the first place to suspect the City would have to pay the fee regardless of whether it wanted to or not.
Another problem Diedrich and Marchione had with the fee was that it was solely imposed on municipalities, meaning that unincorporated areas weren’t paying one cent for water, which is every person’s most basic necessity. Diedrich also pointed out that 80 to 90 percent of the state’s surface water is in unincorporated land.
The state claims the water fees are necessary to balance its budget, but Diedrich isn’t buying it.
“It’s the state’s way of covering the costs of groundwater,” he said. “In my opinion, that’s not balancing the budget.”
(from Maricopa Monitor, TriValleyCentral.com, November 1, 2011)
The names and people don’t
matter much, just tired players in a tedious game of politics and money. The
State of Arizona
Without this intimate
relationship, housing developers investing a million and hoping to make
millions will not be able to certify, guarantee, warrant there will be a
100-year assured supply of the stuff.
From the other side, millions
will not buy what isn’t there.
Ground water? Aquifers? Both
are ephemeral!
If y’care to see what’s there,
look out your backdoor.
