Lincoln County Commission still doesn’t get it
-
(FF: 51:00) The LCC discussed removing an evening meeting that they
recently started. The ‘excuse’ two of the commissioners made (Schmidt and
Otten – they ...
The demise of Tacoma Park
-
Some years ago when I was the president of the Tacoma Park board of
directors, I worked with a woman who was getting a Ph.D. in history. Her
dissertati...
Tripp County Weather
-
A few days ago temperature was around 106F, then the wind shifted to the
north and in about 30 minutes, temperature dropped to around 71F. What
looked like...
Oglala Lakota oddities from 2016 election
-
In South Dakota’s 2016 general election, Oglala Lakota was the only county
to vote yes to accept election-law revisions that the Legislature approved
in th...
The Ledge #680: Inside The Hudson Compound
-
If you happen to follow me on social media (and why wouldn't you?) you have
probably noticed that every week I post a collage of some of the albums
I've...
Gathering with Friends to Watch
-
Sometimes a big spectacle can bring people together in good ways, even if
it's just on the TV. You sit around and as the event unfurls, you chat and
give i...
Goodbye, South Dakota
-
At 12:55 pm CDT on Friday, May 27, my status as a lifelong South Dakotan
ended. I crossed the state line en route to the city in which my wife and I
now ...
In Between the Mixtapes
-
Five paragraphs about my new writing habit, and how there's more to this
life than writing about your first Def Leppard concert, apparently.
Check out Dakotagraph on Facebook
-
Thanks for stopping by Dakotagraph. I hope it is useful and provides some
inspiration for taking photos in South Dakota and elsewhere. For more
active post...
First look at Floating Horses now available
-
Some great historic film footage and interviews are featured in the first
extended look at *Floating Horse: The Life of Casey Tibbs*. You can view it
on th...
Northern Exposure
-
It was a gorgeous day to be outside. After what seemed like a month of
sub-zero temps, some of which was designated The Great Polar Vortex Event
of 2014, i...
11 years ago
Search This Blog
You're bound to get idears if you go thinkin' about stuff. ["Tom Joad," in John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath]
Occasionally, I will mention my job, my public service activities, and other aspects of my life to offer my readers a better perspective on where I'm coming from. But to be clear:
"The views that I express represent my own opinions, based on my own education and experience, not the opinions of any other entity, party, or group to which I belong. I give these opinions in my individual capacity, as a private citizen, and as someone who gives a good gosh darn about his community, his country, and the truth."
In other words: my blog, my words, my point of view. Enjoy!
Madville Times: South Dakota's linkiest and thinkiest political blog, coming to you from the glistening green shores of Lake Herman. Always lakey, never shakey!
Other Analytics
Reread, Reuse, Recycle...
This blog printed on 100% recycled electrons.
The Lake County Commission went on the road Tuesday to "research" (I giggle just a little) their bike trail extension plans. Real research would have included riding their bikes out to Lake Madison.
Connecting the current spur of the bike trail that ends at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service entrance (hey! FWS! Close that facility before you close the Booth Hatchery!) to the county's public access area on the southwest shore of Lake Madison. To get there, the county needs to lay about one and a quarter miles of new trail south along Highway 19, then east parallel to 236th Street, along the south edge of the remaining county poor farm land. That eastward stretch has a shelterbelt on it. The commissioners and highway superintendent Scott Mathison had the good gosh-darn sense to suggest that the county save the trees:
Once on site, the commissioners and Lake County Highway Superintendent Scott Mathison seemed to feel the north side of the trees was best. They seemed to agree that putting the trail along the road or going through the shelterbelt would likely require taking out several trees, which would be an expensive proposition.
Mathison seemed confident that the trail would work on the north side by taking out the volunteer bushes and trimming up trees. The commissioners did not take any formal vote on the matter [Jane Utecht, "County Takes Research Road Trip," Madison Daily Leader, 2013.08.21].
Yay for trees! Madison's bike trail currently runs through mostly open country. After a mile or two of leaning into the sun and stiff south wind, all pedalers will enjoy that quarter mile of shade and shelter. Keep those trees!
The county could save a little concrete by continuing the southeasterly diagonal of the first part of this trail extension right on through the Sunset Harbor development right to the public access area beach. Residents there would enjoy quick and easy bicycle access, and cyclists from town could get to the beach faster with less time spent alongside the noisy highway. Developer Dan Lemme might be interested in such a trail proposal. He met with commissioners on their road trip at Sunset Harbor and proposed that the county swap him some of its poor-farm land for the squiggly, woodsy strip of land he owns on the south shore of Herkimer Pond. Utecht's text is fuzzy here, but she reports that Lemme suggested continuing the bike path through that area for beach access. Perhaps Lemme would also support the mountain-bike loops that Tony and I think would be a great idea!
Connecting the current Madison bike path to the county's beach is a good idea. But remember: if you really want bicycle bliss, you've got to build a loop. I have my plan for a loop around Lake Herman; our county commissioners should think big and extend their current trail in a long figure out around Lake Madison and Brant Lake down to Chester and back!
Walking down Egan this afternoon, I noticed something funny in front of the funeral home.
A rowboat, in front of Ellsworths'? I know Bob's close to the creek, but I don't think of the mortuary as the place for jokes about high water.
No joke, alas.
Maurice "Maury" Beyer, age 86, died Tuesday here in Madison. Maury ran Marr's Beach on the west edge of Lake Madison for 40 years. Keeping vigil out front of the funeral home is "Herkimer," the intrepid "fisherman" turned loose each year by Maury on the slough near Marr's Beach to pursue the wily carp and puzzle folks coming to Madison up Highway 19. Herkimer was eventually joined in the slough by the mysterious woman seen seated here with him, and then by a third, smaller figure whose progeny was the cause of great rumor and speculation around Lake County.
Maury's photo was in the local paper the night before he died. That photo showed four generations of Beyer men: Maury, his son Brian, Brian's son Christopher, and Christopher's two-month-old baby boy Landon in his great-grandpa's lap. Landon's uncles Steven and Scott also made the trip from Colorado to visit Maury and join that family photo on October 26.
Visitation is today, remembrances this evening. Expect many fish stories. Funeral is tomorrow, Saturday afternoon. I offer my condolences to Maury's wife Betty and his family. You can do the same on the Ellsworth Funeral Home website.
Blog and bike enthusiasts alike, up for a bike ride tomorrow morning? Regular commenter, avid cyclist, and MHS debate alum Tony Amert is in town for America's birthday and suggested we ride our mountain bikes from Lake Herman to Lake Madison and back, as we both did most separately a couple July 4ths ago. Then we thought, heck, why not invite everyone else?
The plan:
Meet at the public access boat ramp on the west side of Lake Herman at 8 a.m. Saturday, July 3, 2010. That's on Cottonwood Cove Trail, within view of my green house.
Recommended gear: fat tires (we're riding lots of gravel) and water
Estimated distance: about 22 miles from lake to lake (longer if we get lured by detours)
Planned route: see map! We'll go south around Lake Herman first, through the boonies to Lake Madison, and up to the new public access area. From there, we'll wend out way back toward Madison and Lake Herman.
Possible detours: east on the paved bike path to Johnson's point; charge through downtown; loop through Lake Herman State Park and Dirks Resort.
Come climb some gravel hills (slight bumps, my Black Hills friends will call them) and anoint yourselves in the cooling waters of Lake County's crystal blue-green gems. Come ride!
Some people think signs like this are signs of progress: But when you go to the lake, would you rather see this: Or this: That happy blue sign is your welcome to the newest public access area on Lake Madison. After considerable public discussion last year, Lake County has opened its shoreline property to the public for fishing and recreation. The entrance is on 236th Street, not quite a half-mile east of Highway 19.
Where a chain gate hung two weeks ago, the driveway is now open. But don't steal that tree.
Through the shelterbelt, you're greeted by this view: Long driveway, wide beach, and a nice view of the western lobe of Lake Madison. The county commission also appears to have taken heed of local folks' obsession with parking. There's room for five times as many cars and trucks as there is for fishermen sitting cheek to cheek on the beach.
Your tax dollars at work: there's a nice dock on floats, just waiting for fishermen on the beach. There's no boat ramp here, so docile fisherfolk won't need to move over every few minutes for folks launching and beaching.
On my Friday afternoon visit, there were a couple of ladies reclining on the beach and flattering their swimsuits. Courtesy forbade my snapping their pix, so instead...
...outhouses. Folks around here are almost as obsessed with potty as with parking. The county and A-1 Portable Toilets have us covered, with Men's and Women's. (The bikini ladies are just around the men's station.)
Ah, so clean, so commodious....
Check out the new trees! Just as pretty as Commissioner Bert Verhey painted them. Some of the McMansioneers on Woodland Drive had concerns about allowing the common folk access to the neighboring county land. The county thus planted some really nice spruces all along the eastern fence. Now the neighbors won't be disturbed by the view of those fisherman... or bikini ladies... or the county gravel pit.
Alongside the spruces toward the shore, there's also a really big water pump and hose at water's edge. If the fishermen get too rowdy, I assume the sheriff can come out, fire up the pump, and powerwash miscreants right off the beach. Cool.
That reminds me: the new public access area adjoins the county gravel pit, not to mention the hundred-some acres of the rest of the old poor farm that the county rents out for crops. There goes the county mingling recreation and industry. Didn't the commission consult with David Pitts, who said the two don't mix?
But I gaze eagerly into that gravel pit and see an opportunity. Just think what a great mountain bike park we could build here.
There are already a number of truck tracks around the county gravel pit area. Add on to them. Haul out the remaining easy-to-get gravel for public use, then bring in Rapid City bike trail expert Tony Amert to supervise grading out some fun and swoopy adventure trails.
Come on, sheriff—let me in!
The coming extension of the Madison bike trail south along Highway 19 makes turning the poor farm into a bike farm a natural next step. But let's not stop there. Let's think really big.
The grounds south of the beach include a big basin that looks an awful lot like an amphitheater. Bring a couple bands and a few hundred picnic blankets, and you have a lakeside music festival! Lake Madison Development Association, discuss.
The new public access area is near the site of Old Madison, the first county seat. The county seat moved when certain city fathers swiped the county safe from the Lake Madison site and hauled it in the dark of night to "New" Madison, the present county seat. (Ah, our fair city, established on a foundation of theft and secrets. Again, discuss.)
Extending the bike trail out to the public access area opens itself to another festival event: we could re-enact the great county safe heist! Bring out a bunch of replica safes, load them on trailers, and challenge cyclists to hitch up and race back to town lugging a few hundred pounds of steel and county papers. First one to the courthouse wins a DQ Blizzard and a rubdown!
And how about some shady picnic space? That shelterbelt along the county road looks pretty healthy. Run one spur of the bike trail through the shade along the north edge of the trees, mow some clearings, place some picnic tables... presto! Another step toward the fabled Bicentennial/Semiquincentennial Park that fisherpeople, bicyclists, and swimsuit-clad picnickers could all enjoy!
Oh, about those swimsuits. Who needs those curves, when just up the road I could find some curves I can really get into:
Fellow mountain-bikionados riding out to the new public access area might enjoy this alternate route back to town. A half mile north from the Highway 19-County Road 236 intersection lies one of those welcome prairie rarities: an honest-to-goodness curvy road! The gravel road snakes west through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife refuge. Not quite the thrill and excitement you can find on two wheels out in the Black Hills, but still a quiet, scenic country ride away from highway traffic.
Plus, you probably won't get shot.
Lake County has made a wise investment in creating the new public access area on the southwest shore of Lake Madison. It provides another welcome recreation opportunity for residents and visitors alike. It also opens the door to new recreational endeavors that would draw more people to enjoy our fair square of the prairie.
-------------------------- Bonus video! A very mellow view of my ride along the USFW road. Sorry, no wipe-outs, just gravel and grass, water and wind, birds and a bunny... all in pixellated Impressionism. ;-)
The action at tonight's Madison City Commission meeting could bring Knight and Carver's blade production crews a little work: one of K&C's products, the LS56-100 8.3-meter blade, fits 100-kilowatt turbines, which would meet the 150-kW maximum our new wind turbine ordinances would allow. Now if only an enterprising wind power enthusiast can find someplace to erect a turbine that will satisfy the setbacks....
Maybe better news for the wind industry comes from Cape Cod, where the feds have finally approved America's first offshore wind farm. Cape Wind will start producing electricity in time for Barack Obama's reinauguration, with a planned capacity of 468 megawatts. Given that this offshore energy source won't explode or leak 5000 gallons of oil a day, Cape Wind is probably on the right track.
Besides, when one of the only externalities is that the turbines will disrupt the view from the mansions of rich liberal East Coast elites, my conservative readers should be all about more wind power.
------------------------- By the way, the Washington Post notes that the wind industry is taking a hit from the recession and from uncertainty over the energy security and climate change bill. Wow, if the Senate would have gotten in gear and passed that bill last year, we might have avoided those layoffs in Howard and the death of Big Stone II. Think about that, Senators Thune and Johnson!
The Congressional Medal of Honor Foundation has recognized Madison's Dylan Nelson with one of three 2010 Citizen Service Above Self Awards. From the award nomination:
Dylan Nelson of Madison, South Dakota has been recognized for sacrificing his own life while saving two others in Lake Madison on August 8, 2009. Nelson was swimming with his younger brother and cousin along a sandbar when a strong current pulled them under. After Nelson swam out of the strong current, he saw that this brother and cousin were still trapped. Nelson entered the current, saved his cousin, and brought him closer to shore where a man with a Jet Ski took the cousin to shore. Nelson then returned to rescue his brother, again taking him to the man with the Jet Ski. After that, Dylan went underwater and drowned. Dylan Nelson’s act of extraordinary selflessness and bravery continues to be an inspiration and a credit to the state of South Dakota and to his fellow Americans.
The Sioux Falls School District has gotten itself into hot water over selling the addresses of its constituents. And indeed, I must agree with Sioux Falls parent Shannon Barnes:
They tell them, you know, 'Don't post your personal information on Facebook. Don't post your personal information on MySpace. Don't give out your address. Don't even give out what school you go to,' And yet, they are selling these names and addresses [Shannon Barnes, quoted in "Complaint Alleges Names Could Fall into Wrong Hands," KSFY.com, 2009.08.25].
As Lake Herman Sanitary District president, I received a call earlier this summer from a salesman for a local retailer who asked if we would give him our address list so they could do some direct mail advertising. As noted in our minutes from last week's meeting, I declined to hand out that list. (At least Lawrence and I can agree on something! ;-) )
Of course, I hear the Lake Madison Sanitary District will sell you a copy of their address list for a reasonable fee. Porbably a good deal. Besides, Lake Madison folks spend more money, anyway—much better targets for an ad campaign.
I'm also happy to note that my current employer, Dakota State University, does not sell its student lists to commercial interests or anyone else. Heck, we aren't even printing a paper directory this year.
Call Jay Trobec! We've got a Severe Brainstorm Warning in Lake County!
Water quality on our lakes here in Lake County hasn't been too bad this year. Lake Herman has had some stinky days, but the rain and cool temps have kept the green scum at bay compared to other years.
On Madison and Brant, a big problem was that folks didn't want to create a new taxing authority on top of their sanitary and road districts to work on water quality. On Herman, a big problem is that statute doesn't appear to let us spend money on anything other than a multi-million-dollar sewer system that isn't going to get built.
I think I just found a solution. We don't need to create new water project districts. We simply need to amend state law to permit sanitary districts to assume the powers of water project districts.
46A-18-20.2. Sanitary district assuming water project district powers. The board of trustees of any sanitary district incorporated under chapter 34A-5 may submit to the voters of the district at an annual election or a special election called and held in accordance with chapter 9-13 the question of whether the district shall be authorized to exercise the powers of water project districts incorporated under this chapter, or the petitioners' application for incorporation filed in accordance with § 34A-5-6 may request such authority. Upon approval of the grant of such authority by a majority of the voters voting on the question, or upon entry of the order incorporating the district if the application has requested such authority, the board of trustees shall be authorized to exercise all powers which a water project district organized under this chapter may exercise, including the powers granted by §§ 46A-18-31 to 46A-18-73, inclusive.
Check those numbers before passage, but otherwise, there you go, Gerry and Russ! House Bill 1001 for the 2010 session, all written up and ready to go, good practical legislation that will benefit your neighbors!
------------------- p.s.: I'm working on a new website for the Lake Herman Sanitary District. The site is built on Drupal, so I can publish district info much faster and more conveniently than on the original sanitary district website, which requires offline FrontPage/Notepad editing and FTP transfer. And we all know FrontPage is dead. I'll keep working—let me know what you think!
18-year-old Dylan Nelson drowned at Lake Madison last Saturday, August 8. Now his mother, Kristy Nelson of Madison, is asking for your help in encouraging South Dakota Game Fish & Parks to put up a sign on Walker's Point to warn swimmers and boaters of the potential danger in that area of the lake.
Now we all know that swimming requires caution in any water. We shouldn't have to post danger signs to remind folks of common sense along every stretch of Lake Madison's relatively calm 16 miles of shoreline.
USGS topographic map of Walker's Point and gravel pit area, south side of Lake Madison, SD
But Walker's Point seems to be a special case. The moment my dad heard about the drowning on the police scanner, he noted that Walker's Point sits right by old gravel pits. He said there are old excavations underwater that cause undercurrents. This GF&P map appears to support that observation, showing two anomalous pits, 13 and 15 feet deep, west of Walker's Point, just south of Best Point. It's just a few steps from a shallow sandbar to two deep holes. There are no similar sudden deep spots anywhere else in Lake Madison.
Whatever the cause of the unusual hydrodynamics at Walker's Point, Dylan Nelson and the brother and cousin he helped save from drowning aren't the only ones to experience this hazard. Kristy Nelson says that since last Saturday's accident, a number of people have contacted her to say that they or people they know have experienced similar trouble while swimming in that area. Not that Mrs. Nelson needs any convincing... but GF&P might. Mrs. Nelson has asked GF&P to put up a sign warning of the drop-offs and possible undercurrents, and GF&P has said they will look into it.
To help GF&P look into it, Mrs. Nelson is asking anyone else with stories about close calls off Walker's Point to contact her (nelsokr atgmaildotcom) or the GF&P.
Some long-time locals may know the topography and history of Lake Madison, but I've been here in Lake County 30-plus years and was surprised to learn about the hazards off Walker's Point. Increasing numbers of out-of-town visitors and new residents could use a heads-up as well. A warning sign at Walker's Point, maybe even a posting of that underwater topo-map, would be a useful, neighborly reminder that could prevent some future bad news.
Somber kudos to journalist Elisa Sand of the Madison Daily Leader for getting the details on the drowning at Lake Madison, a hard story to cover, but well worth her special Sunday coverage. According to the police, the drowning victim, 18-year-old Dylan Nelson, likely gave his life saving his brother and his cousin:
Deputy Tim Walburg of the Lake County Sheriff's Office said that Nelson and two others had decided to go swimming at about 3:30 p.m. Saturday. The family was tubing near Walker's Point. Walburg said that the three young men got stuck in the undercurrent and ran into trouble. Nelson was able to get the other two boys to shore. A man on a jet ski also helped with their rescue, but when he went back to the area, he lost sight of Nelson. The two younger males, Nelson's brother Andrew and a cousin from Lake Preston, were taken to the hospital.
Authorities say that fatigue from saving the other boys is likely what caused Nelson to go under, unable to fight the undercurrent, which is caused by a quick drop in water level.
So suppose you've organized a local environmental action group. You've had some small successes, educated your neighbors, raised awareness, even gotten donations from residents and local governments. You lose one campaign to form a governing body to carry out similar functions, but you still have $14,000 in the bank to continue your work. Do you...
A. retool your government plan to create a better agency that voters will accept;
B. sustain your group's momentum by continuing to work on environmental issues; or
I'm surprised. The IWQC has done good work, promoting the water monitoring project (of which I am still a wader-wearing member), funding coupons for zero-phosphorus fertilizer to reduce pollution, and helping build the Wolff Dam on Richland Slough to control run-off into Lake Madison. The IWQC's efforts earned enough respect to win funding from both the City of Madison and Lake County (and that's not easy—I've tried!). To end those efforts, especially when they still have $14K left in the kitty to pursue more projects, seems an unproductive overreaction to voters' rejection of creating a government entity to carry out such projects.
Some comments in MDL's coverage of the story (sorry, no link! print edition only, 2009.07.27, page 1) just don't sit right with me:
IWQC board chair Robert Todd tells MDL, "We currently feel we are not able to continue." Put $14,000 in my bank account, and I could continue for quite some time. The committee formed to do much more than just campaign for a water project district... didn't it? I know we had stars in our eyes about forming the district and getting $3M in stimulus money to do 30 projects all at once... but is it that hard to come back to reality and concentrate on doing one or two small projects, as the committee has done until now?
Refunds: The IWQC plans to hand its $14K bank balance over to the Lake Madison Development Association, which has been the main source of its money. However, city and county taxpayers get no cut, since, according to Todd, that money was spent specifically on water quality testing through DSU. I guess I didn't know the city and county had designated their donations for that specific purpose. Hmmm....
Dropping the Ball: IWQC board member Jan Nicolay expresses the hope that "Maybe somewhere down the road someone will pick up the idea [of a water project district] and move it forward." Yet the IWQC is in the best position to sustain the momentum toward that goal. If Nicolay and the rest of the board really want to see a water project district come to fruition someday, wouldn't it be more logical to maintain a functioning, solvent organization that has a demonstrated record of educating the public on water quality issues and serves as a forum for bringing like-minded residents together to organize successful projects? Even if the current IWQC board is tired of politics (and I understand completely if this summer's campaign and the bruising defeat on July 18 had that effect), the board could just keep its head down, stick with small but meaningful projects, and remain as a resource for future organizers who want to give another election a go.
In politics, you win some, and you lose some. But losing a vote doesn't mean you have to accept that the majority is right. Folks who voted yes on the water project district (and a fair number of the folks who voted no) still believe there are projects we can do to improve the watershed in Lake County. The Interlakes Water Quality Committee had built up talent and funds to make such projects happen. And as a volunteer organization, they don't have to answer to the majority; they can just do what they know is right.
I wasn't convinced a water project district was the right thing to do. But I'm not convinced abandoning the cause completely is the right course, either. It will be interesting to see what course the IWQC chooses at its next (last?) meeting on Thursday, August 6, 7 p.m., at the Madison Public Library.
The Madville Times mobile unit malfunctioned about a half mile east of James River Equipment, so alas, no vid/pix from the parking lot polling tent. But the vote on the proposed Interlakes Water Project District is in: voters at Lake Madison and Brant Lake have said no. Final vote count:
For: 102 (31%)
Against: 228 (69%)
That's 330 votes out of 709 eligible voters, just about 47% turnout. Not bad for a glorious summer day when folks could be fishing instead.
District proponent Robert Todd heard an assortment of reasons expressed against the district:
opposition to more taxes (the economy is tight)
exclusion of non-resident landowners from voting (well, that is the law)
belief that cleaning up the lakes is an "impossible task" (hey, that's never stopped me from trying!)
District opponent Steven Kant should be relieved... but actually, he says the vote doesn't feel like a victory. I can understand his mixed emotions. The district supporters never quite sold me on the idea of a water project district, but I've always been a supporter of their water quality goals. I hope this landslide (are we allowed in this case to say waterslide?) defeat of the water project district signals only a rejection of creating a new layer of government and taxes and not a rejection of the principles of taking care of the watershed that makes Lake County such an attractive place to live and play. I hope a number of those folks who voted no are still willing to contribute their time and money to promote other water quality projects, like the recommendations listed by Steve Kant himself.
Whether or not the district passed, the Interlakes Water Quality Committee planned to continue its efforts on a volunteer basis. And there are still algae, silt, and carp in our lakes. The IWQC will talk about what to do next about those water quality problems at its next meeting, Thursday, August 6, 7 p.m. at the Madison Public Library.
Steve Kant isn't paying me for this one: I just find it darned interesting. And since Lake County has no campaign finance reporting website (and isn't legally obliged to have one), I figure I'm the next best thing.
Water Project District: Required reading before you vote!
The big vote on the Interlakes Water Project District takes place tomorrow (Saturday, July 18) at 10 a.m. in the big tent in the Hillside Resort parking lot. I can't get my Al Franken one-man mobile uplink unit working, but I may bike over with my notepad and camera to observe local democracy in action.
Local campaigning has certainly been in action around Lakes Madison and Brant. Mr. Kant tells me one of his fellow opponents reports receiving four "Vote Yes" mailings in four days. Less than pleased with the paper in his mailbox, that opponent called district organizer Robert Todd and learned the "Vote Yes" committee is spending $6,000 on its campaign from $10,000 allocated last year by the Lake Madison Development Association for this purpose.
Kant reports that, for Web presence and a couple mailings, opponents have spent $300.89.
Now I'll note that the amount of money spent on ads and such is no indication of the merits of the arguments. You can read the $6,000 spent by district supporters as an indication of how important they think it is to create a governing and taxing entity to protect water quality in Lake County.
Then again, around here, successful county commission candidates can spend less than a thousand bucks on their campaigns. Gerry Lange spent less than $6,000 last year on his campaign and won a seat in the state legislature. A $6,000 campaign fund for a water project district involving just over 700 voters may also indicate the deep-pockets mindset of the organizers... a mindset that may carry over to determining the tax levy. Whatever the outcome, there are a number of Lake Herman residents who are relieved they won't have Lake Madison residents setting their tax levy.
-------------------- p.s.: Madison Daily Leader publisher Jon Hunter his editorial toe in the water and urges his lake readers to vote yes on the water project district.
Last I checked, District 8 State Senator Russell Olson lives within the proposed boundaries of the Interlakes Water Project District. He stands to see his taxes raised by this district. A serious fiscal conservative, Senator Olson should have something to say about the creation of a new tax burden and a new layer of government for his immediate neighbors. Having referred to the federal stimulus package as "a blessing and a curse," Senator Olson should also have something to say about the water project district pursuing a massive three-million-dollar infusion of those federal dollars into the local economy.
Yet as far as I know, our man Russ has made no public statements on the water project district (WPD) or the upcoming public vote on July 18.
Now I can understand a politician keeping his head down on an issue not directly before his agency. Why risk alienating voters when a vote is a local issue, not a legislative issue?
But wait a minute: maybe water quality is a legislative issue. Both proponents and opponents of the WPD at Saturday's meeting in Chester got me thinking: the WPD would tax lake residents to pay for a problem caused mostly by people outside that taxing jurisdiction. It would create a new layer of government to address a problem that existing agencies and regulations apparently aren't addressing.
Why aren't existing agencies and regulations taking care of water quality problems? (We'll assume there are water quality problems... unless some global-warming deniers would like to take a break and argue that Lake Madison doesn't have algae blooms.) Some obvious hypotheses present themselves:
Current regulations are written to favor business and agriculture over environmental concerns.
Existing agencies (DENR, state Ag. Dept., etc.) don't have sufficient resources to enforce current regulations.
Existing agencies are choosing not to carry out their statutory duties.
Whichever of those hypotheses might be true, they all have something in common: they would all be legislative issues. Our legislators could write tough water quality regulations. They could give the boot to any preferential industry treatment. They could increase funding and staff for DENR to investigate water pollution, construct retention dams, and buy or lease land for other water quality projects. And they could light a fire under any Pierre functionaries who are sitting on their hands instead of doing their duty.
Besides, water quality is inherently bigger than any one local jurisdiction. We see it in the pending WPD proposal. The district would encompass Lakes Madison and Brant, yet the pollution is coming from sources west along Silver Creek and north of the city of Madison. If we foul up our water in Lake County, that directly affects downstream in Moody and Minnehaha. Watersheds don't fit our happy grid of townships and counties. Environmental issues demand local action, but they also require some state-level oversight to ensure smaller districts don't flush their troubles away to the poor suckers downstream.
These are all issues that Russ and Mitch and Gerry can and should holler about. Yet the Legislature appears to leave it to small lake communities to decide whether water quality is worth taking action and to find the money to do something about it.
There's certainly a debate to be had about local control versus state efforts. But there's an argument to be made that if the South Dakota Legislature (not just Russell Olson, but the whole kit and kaboodle, plus the governor) were serious about water quality and other environmental issues, Lakes Madison and Brant would not be holding a vote this weekend. That's something not just for Russ to keep in mind this Saturday at the Hillside, but for Russ, Mitch, Gerry, and the rest of us to keep in mind during the 2010 Legislative session... and for the rest of us to keep in mind during the 2010 election.
The proposed Interlakes Water Project District (which faces a public vote Saturday, July 18) would include the sanitary districts currently established around Lakes Madison and Brant. As you may recall, the original plan was to include the Lake Herman Sanitary District in the district. However, political opposition (I heard the Lake Herman Development Association—i.e., fishermen—said they would hire a lawyer to fight any such new district) induced the water project district (WPD) organizers to leave Herman out.
Including Lake Herman would have created an oddly discontiguous jurisdiction... though no more odd than the Heartland Consumer Power District (with outposts in Groton, Volga, and Madison) and the United States (Alaska and Hawaii). Including Herman would have made hydrological sense (hydro-logic?): the 17,000 acres draining into Lake Herman are the head of the Lake County branch of the Lower Big Sioux Watershed, which flows through Silver Creek to Lake Madison.
Now opponents of the WPD contend that leaving Herman out of the plan compromises the WPD's ability to solve water quality issues. (Make group happy, torque off another—you can't win 'em all!) At the July 11 public meeting in Chester, WPD supporters offered a number of responses on why leaving Herman out won't be so bad:
The district's taxing authority is limited to its legal boundaries, but it can spend that money on projects anywhere in the watershed. For example, the WPD could lease land north of Lake Herman to plant switchgrass along the tributary that brings lots of ag run-off into the lake by the golf course. (However, it is worth noting that Robert Todd, lead organizer of the WPD, said he is "concerned" about spending money on projects that would directly benefit Lake Herman when no one on Lake Herman is paying.)
Lakes Madison and Brant drain their own 29,000-acre watershed. Even if they never touched the Herman watershed, they could do a lot of water quality work.
Lake Herman doesn't have the population and tax base to make the district work. Robert Todd said that the planned assessment levels would add only $10,000 from Herman to the $80,000 the WPD tentatively plans to raise from Lakes Madison and Brant. Attorney Rolly Samp said that the biggest landowner on Herman is the State of South Dakota, and unless the state decides to offer payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT—my new policy term of the weekend!), Herman just can't support such a levy.
Lake Herman itself is not the leading source of pollutants. Robert Todd gave the example of phosphorus: while Herman has noticeable phosphorus levels, those levels jump significantly before the water reaches Lake Madison. Todd cited the old poultry facility (that would be Wenk's), ag operations north of Madison, the city itself, and the north shore of Lake Madison as key sources of that phosphorus.
I find point 3 particularly interesting. "Only" $10,000 from Lake Herman is still double the highest tax ever levied by the Lake Herman Sanitary District and almost five times the current tax levy.
More interesting is a combination of points 1 and 4. As WPD committeeman Martin Jarrett pointed out at Saturday's meeting, 85% of the pollution affecting water quality in Lake County comes from agriculture. 14% comes from the City of Madison. It's not like us dang dirty folks at Lake Herman are sending algae blooms to Lake Madison. The WPD could include Herman, and it still would be taxing a bunch of people who aren't the main cause of the problem.
Put harshly, the WPD will take money from lake residents and redistribute it to polluters. This money flow seems backward. At the very least, it suggests that the WPD would do better to include the entire county, or at least the formal watershed boundaries (folks up Nunda way send their water down a different track), so that the major polluters would at least bear some tax burden.
Better yet, let's be creative: perhaps we need a local version of cap-and-trade for nutrient run-off. Give every resident a certain per-acre phosphorus and nitrate allotment. If you want to use chemical fertilizer or run a certain number of cattle above your allotment, you have to buy nutrient credits from organic farmers or landowners who aren't using their allotment. Or perhaps a county-wide WPD could simply impose a higher levy on the ag land identified as the primary source of nutrient load and soil eroision.
The WPD organizers emphasize that the district, if approved Saturday, will be open to expansion. If Lake Herman or the city of Madison or any other jurisdiction wants to join, those residents can petition and vote and start contributing tax dollars right along with Lakes Madison and Brant. For now, as the organizers say, we've got to start somewhere.
But including Lake Herman, by itself, is not a solution. The WPD organizers themselves now say so. The WPD can do work anywhere in the watershed, with or without the official participation of Lake Herman. The only direct effect of including an area in the WPD is to raise that area's taxes. At that point, the question should be not "Where's Lake Herman?" but "Where is everybody?"
I gave the proponents of the Interlakes Water Project District a full post listing the main functions and benefits of their plan. Now let's list the points of opposition raised by the more vocal attendees at yesterday's meeting in Chester:
The proposed water project district (WPD) includes only Lakes Madison and Brant. To make serious progress on water quality, the district needs to include at least Lake Herman, if not the entire county.
We already pay taxes to support the Department of Agriculture, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and numerous other agencies to protect water quality. We should be able to get our money's worth from existing agencies without piling on more taxes for another agency.
Lake residents are already seeing higher tax assessments from the county. Yet the lakes continue to have to form additional taxing entities, such as road and sanitary districts, to obtain services that the county doesn't provide. Lake taxation is already unfair; adding another special district only exacerbates the unfairness.
WPD proponent Martin Jarrett said that 85% of the water quality problems come from agriculture. 14% come from the city of Madison. Only a tiny fraction results from the actions of lake residents. Therefore, said one attendee, it seems unfair that lake residents should pay higher taxes when Joe Blow who lives two miles outside the district causes the bulk of the pollution.
Instead of creating a new district to redistribute tax dollars in leases and incentives, we need to put some teeth in existing laws and enforce fines for pollution.
Now as Rolly Samp said at the meeting, it's always easier to oppose than propose: building a plan requires making every piece fit together, while opposing a plan requires finding just one piece that doesn't work. But, as my classical conservative (and policy debate!) friends will tell you, such are the reasonable rules of the public policy game. If you have the temerity to suggest changing the status quo, the burden falls on you to justify the change and present a solid plan.
So how do these arguments against (and the earlier arguments for) the water project district stack up? Analysis, commentary, and wild speculation coming up!
Robert Todd opened yesterday's informational meeting in Chester on the proposed Interlakes Water Project District with his explanation of what the district would do and why that would be good. Here's a summary of his pitch:
A formal water project district (WPD) would be able to carry out long-term projects (Todd mentioned a ten-year plan) that ad hoc volunteer groups cannot sustain.
While there are entities like the state Department of Environment and Natural Resources and East Dakota Water Development District that work on water quality, those entitites limited funds spread over broad areas. The DENR has already funded the Wolff Dam project near Lake Madison and probably doesn't have much more to spend here. EDWDD directs its funding priorities to the Big Sioux River. Forming a WPD here would allow greater local control and focused attention on the local watershed.
A WPD can levy taxes to support water quality projects that benefit everyone in the watershed. While the district could levy a maximum of $1 per $1000 in property value, a 50¢/K levy would be adequate for the district's first couple years of operation. That's $100 a year for a $200K property. A 50¢/K levy would bring in $80K for the district's annual budget. [Note: that means there is about $160 million in taxable property value around Lakes Madison and Brant.]
A WPD can also seek special assessments for additional revenue. Obtaining a special assessment requires an affirmative vote by 60% of landowners in the district.
A WPD can qualify for federal stimulus dollars that volunteer groups can't get. However, the deadline for applying for the remaining stimulus money is October 1. Thus, to have a shot at the money, this district needs to start now.
The WPD would have five major action areas:
controlling nutrient and silt loads (primary area of concern: immediately west of Lake Madison), getting cattle out of the streams by helping develop alternative water supplies
reëstablishing grassy waterways
building and maintaining retention dams
controlling carp (they cause bank erosion, release phosphorus and other nutrients that aggravate algae growth)
educate residents on water quality issues and actions
A dozen interested residents gave patient and polite attention to this pitch. How did they respond? Stay tuned... more to come!
I'm not sold yet on the idea of forming a water project district around Lake Madison and Brant Lake. So the toughest part of yesterday's public meeting in Chester to discuss forming such a district was Rolly Samp's pitch.
Rolly has been a summer denizen of Lake Madison all his life. His grandkids are the sixth generation of his family to get to enjoy his family property on the lake. And this July 4th, the lakeshore by that property was too green to swim or fish.
Rolly sees the proposed Interlakes Water Project as the best way to ensure that his grandkids and the following generations can continue to enjoy our lakes. Not just the best way—the only way. As Rolly explains it, a water project district would have the organization and status to be eligible for three million dollars of federal stimulus money. If the district can get going and apply by the October 1 deadline, it could grab that cash and fund 30 projects in the local watershed. Those projects would have an enormous long-term impact on water quality, says Rolly.
Without a formal district, there'll be no stimulus money, and those 30 projects won't happen for 30 years. Rolly says Lake Herman would turn to a cattail slough. The lake he has loved all his life will only decline further into a carpy, algae-covered mess.
And at the end of the meeting, he looks me in the eye and says I need to "get on board" with this project.
I know Rolly from my Prairie Village days. I met his son Mike at Boys State. Rolly's a good guy, a good lawyer (not mutually exclusive categories), and an avid fellow writer. And he makes a pretty good case in favor of forming a water project district here in Lake County. So I neither lightly nor eagerly look him back in the eye and say I disagree.
That's why I want to spend some time today working through what I heard at yesterday's informational meeting, the fourth and final such public meeting held by proponents of the Interlakes Water Project District. I'll write up the information presented by organizers Robert Todd and Martin Jarrett. I'll explore some of the questions and arguments raised by opponents of the district, as well as the responses offered by the organizers. And then I'll probably presume to offer suggestions to you lucky 709 eligible voters on Lakes Madison and Brant on how to vote this coming Saturday.
Rolly Samp says you and I need to get on board, for the sake of our grandkids (present and potential). Other people of good conscience say no, we don't. This is complicated... and worth thinking about.
Lake Madison resident Steve Kant, an opponent of the proposed Interlakes Water Project (and current Madville Times sponsor), sends along some important information about the upcoming July 18 vote. We were of the impression that Chapter 46A-18 of South Dakota Codified Law, on water project districts, governed the upcoming election. Specifically, SDCL 46A-18-20 requires a 60% vote to create the new district [emphasis mine]:
46A-18-20. Establishment of district--Vote required. If at least sixty percent of the votes cast in an election are in favor of formation of the water project district, the Board of Water and Natural Resources shall by resolution create and establish the water project district and give it a corporate name. Upon filing of a true copy of the resolution with the secretary of state, the district shall become a political subdivision of the state with the authority, power, and duties prescribed by this chapter. Source: SL 1984, ch 293, § 19.
But wait! SDCL Chapter 6-16-5 on special district elections calls for a majority vote:
6-16-5. Election on question of incorporation in districts containing less than one thousand voters--Election of directors or trustees. If the proposed district contains less than one thousand eligible voters as defined in § 6-16-6, the county auditor shall set a date, time, and location for a meeting to be held within the district to conduct an election on the question of formation of the special district. The date may not be more than sixty days after the appropriate board declares that the application for incorporation is valid. The auditor shall appoint three judges of election, one of whom shall serve as the superintendent, to conduct the election. The vote upon the question of incorporation shall be by ballot which conforms to a ballot for a statewide question except that the statement required to be printed on the ballot shall be prepared by the state's attorney. After the vote is cast and counted, the judges shall prepare a certification showing the whole number of ballots cast, together with the number voting for and the number voting against incorporation, and shall return the certification to the county auditor. If a majority of the votes cast on the question of formation is in favor, an election shall be conducted by those present at the same meeting to elect the initial board of directors or trustees. Source: SL 1998, ch 36, § 5; SL 2006, ch 29, § 3; SL 2008, ch 35, § 2, eff. Feb. 27, 2008.
Uh oh! Someone dropped the style-and-form veto pen!
How do we resolve these apparently conflicting statutes? From what Steve tells me, the Secretary of State's office originally advised the 60% vote was the correct standard. However, the Attorney General's office has evidently weighed in to say the newer statute, 6-16-5, takes precedence, and the water project district requires only a majority vote to be formed.
Such conclusion also is supported by SDCL 46A-18-14, which explicitly states that "The election shall be held as provided in §§ 6-16-4 to 6-16-6, inclusive," and which also postdates poor, forgotten 46A-18-20. Darn—supermajorities are kind of fun (as Al Franken will soon attest).
Given that the proposed district has 709 eligible voters, advocates of the district just saw their work get as many as 70 people easier. 60% to 50%+1... that's a big difference! So, while someone at the LRC gets out the higlighter, the advocates of the district breathe a sigh of relief.
If your ears have stopped ringing from all those fireworks, get up and do some civic discourse this week! Supporters of the proposed Interlakes Water Project District are holding four public informational meetings this week to help voters around Lakes Madison and Brant understand what they'll be voting on July 18. The first meeting is tonight! Dates and places:
Monday, July 6, 7–9 p.m., Broadwater Resort, Lake Madison
Tuesday, July 7, 7–9 p.m., Hillside Resort, Lake Madison
Friday, July 10, 7–9 p.m., Tipler Community Center, Lakes Golf Course
Saturday, July 11, 10 a.m.–12 p.m., Chester Community Center
Now remember, opponents of the formation of the water project district are paying me to advertise their position. But I think these meetings should be of interest to all my Lake County neighbors over on our eastern lakes. Pick one, bring your questions, and get ready to vote July 18!
This blog printed on 100% recycled electrons.
