Lawmakers Boiling At Order To Clean Up Waters

Years of juggling limited state tax revenues to cope with increasing federal mandates boiled over Thursday when the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee lashed out at the federal judge who ordered a billion-dollar cleanup of Idaho streams.

“There’s not enough money in this state to do what Judge Dwyer wants,” Republican Rep. Bob Geddes of Preston told his colleagues on the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee.

Last April, U.S. District Judge William Dwyer relented from his original five-year deadline for Idaho to assess the quality of, and clean up if necessary, 962 stream segments throughout the state and agreed to an eight-year timetable.

The Idaho Conservation League and the Idaho Sporting Congress sought the order, claiming that the state was dragging its feet on complying with the federal Clean Water Act and federal regulators had done nothing about it.

State officials have claimed there was no rationale for the stream segments placed on the Dwyer list and that in many cases their water quality is good.

“It’s the opposite of our court system where you’re innocent until proven guilty,” Rep. Jack Barraclough, R-Idaho Falls, complained. “These streams are polluted until proven not polluted.”

Citing the $1 billion cost estimate over the next 7-1/2 years, Geddes expressed concern that the state is being sucked into the same kind of unending financial commitment the Snake River Water Rights Adjudication has become.

So far, the state has only spent $20.5 million on Dwyer’s order, with another $14 million being spent by other interests. In the past decade, the adjudication has cost nearly $30 million and could run another $15 million or more over the next 10 years.

“Are we going to get into the same thing as the adjudication where there is no end in sight?” Geddes asked. “I don’t think the people of the state can afford to spend $1 billion to do what Judge Dwyer wants.”

While Senate Agriculture Chairman Cecil Ingram, R-Boise, suggested a one-cent increase in the sales tax to raise $120 million a year to cover the bill, Geddes wondered out loud about the ramifications of simply ignoring the court order.

Gov. Phil Batt, who has written another $1 million for the work into his new budget, had not considered the possibility of just ignoring Dwyer to save the $1 billion.

But he added, “We’re not sure that’s what it’ll cost. There may be cheaper ways of doing these things. We have to keep looking.”

At the same time, however, Batt seemed to join others in dismissing Ingram’s suggestion that there might be support for a sales tax increase. One budget writer laughed at the thought Idaho voters would support a tax hike to comply with a federal court order when they will not back higher taxes to fix deteriorating school buildings.

“I don’t believe we should have to greatly expand our tax structure to meet these edicts,” Batt said. “I would hope that cooler heads would prevail and make it affordable some way down the line.”

Agriculture Director Pat Takasugi declined to speculate on the ramifications of ignoring Dwyer’s order, saying only that any relief will probably have to come from Congress.