State needs to do the right thing

Dear Editor,

During the spring of 2007, the State of Nebraska, along with the Republican River Basin NRDs agreed to pay surface irrigators in the basin to put the water into the stream instead of irrigating their crops with it. How the NRDs are to pay this bill is very controversial.

Several long-time opponents to ground irrigation have filed suit to block the collection of the property tax portion of the plan. As a result, the NRDs do not have the ability to obtain a bond to pay the obligation to which they agreed.

Regardless of who we think should be paying the bill, I think most will agree that the sellers of the water are due the money that the State and the NRDs promised them. 

Those who raise the question of the constitutionality of the payment method have a reasonable question.  The court will decide the answer, but not until long after the answer is needed.  Those who argue that the state should pay the bill have a legitimate point. Those who say that the people of the Republican River Basin must pay the cost of buying the water, even if the state refuses, are acting in the best economic interest of the area, even if they lose the next election for doing this.

However, until the lawsuit is resolved, the surface irrigators who sold their water are being mistreated and forced to sacrifice for the good of the community when they didn't sign up for that duty .

To resolve this unfairness, I suggest that the State of Nebraska step up to the plate and provide a solution.  The state itself could purchase the bond. If the court rules the tax is constitutional, then the state will get its money back plus interest.  If the court rules that the responsibility is a state obligation, then the court would be saying the state should have picked up the tab in the first place.

There are two ways this can happen. The governor could call a special session of the Legislature to obtain legislative approval of a bond purchase; but by the time that happened, the normal session would already be upon us. Or, the governor could encourage the individuals responsible for managing the state money reserves to make such a purchase.  We know the state or the local people are good for it, so there is no risk to the state. If the state were to take such an action, then it would demonstrate that it wants to be a part of the solution. It would remove the uncertainty from the market. It would honor the commitment the state and the NRDs made to the surface irrigators. 

For the economy of the region to survive, there will be many years in which the state and NRDs will need to buy water, either from surface irrigators or others who can augment the stream. It is important that those making the promises to pay actually keep their promises if they expect anyone to sell them water in the future.  The governor is in a position to cause the State to honor its own commitments and the commitments it strongly encouraged the NRDs to make.

Steve Smith,

Director

WaterClaim

Imperial