Water issue is twisted

An editorial in another newspaper criticizing the recent proposal that would require new development to pay for their own water missed the point entirely. It mistakenly implies it is a flawed plan to conserve water – adding there are “better ways to reduce water use.”

This is not the issue. It is about existing customers having to cut back use so there is water for new development.

They say the proposal will “aggravate other problems…most strikingly, traffic congestion.” This reasoning escapes me.

It also speaks of driving new home prices up. What about the price of water? New water will be very costly, and the rub is that existing customers will share in the cost of buying it for development. Eventually only the wealthy will be able to afford the luxury of outside water.

You can’t blame the building industry for opposing the proposal, but what about the impact on agriculture? Some local growers will go out of business because of cutbacks, while new development marches on.

More development – more cutbacks. When farmland disappears, it is history.

It is unsettling that people who have so much impact on public opinion can get things so twisted.

Glenn Carroll