Irrigation commissioners delay compact resolution vote
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
ST. IGNATIUS — Flathead Joint Board of Control members tabled a resolution of non-support for the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Water Compact on Dec. 23, because commissioners could not agree on final language for the document.
The board agreed to finalize the language later in the week. Commissioners were also split on whether or not the issue should be put to a popular vote by the irrigators represented by the irrigators represented by the board.
"We've got the card before the horse," Commissioner Paul Guenzler said. "We're doing something that I don't thin our irrigators want, and there is only way to find out---what I think our irrigators would like --- is that we need to put it to a vote."
Guenzler said he first proposed having a vote on the compact more than a month ago, but the board was not receptive to the idea. Commissioner Kerry Doney agreed irrigators need to be polled.
"I've been talking to a lot of irrigators who don't believe in the joint board anymore,"Doney said. "We can't really make a decision for them until we know how they feel."
But other commissioners said a referendum this late in the game would undermine the board's ossible influence in the state legislative session, which kicks off Jan. 5 and lasts 90 days. The compact is meant to settle water rights claims for the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. The Tribes have said they intend to file as many as 10,000 claims in the Montana State Water Court if the compact does not pass by a June 30, 2015, deadline imposed by the state.
"We've gone through two election cycles, and two election cycles we have increased the majority of commissioners that are against this compact," said Commissioner Jerry Laskody. "We had a referendum last year that we won. For the board to conduct a referendum now, it would take a long period of time--roughly 90 days--to get a referendum then."
The proposed resolution claims the compact is unconstitutional and that irrigators will receive less water than has been historically allotted to farmers on the project. The resolution also describes discontent with the Unitary Management Board that will consist of tribal and state-appointed representatives who will be tasked with some elements of water management within the boundaries of the Flathead Indian Reservation after the compact is implemented.
The referendum held in 2013 asked if irrigators wanted the Joint Board to continue representing them and tried elements of the boards concerns with the water compact into the questions. The result was narrow, with 38,593 acres in favor of retaining the joint board, and owners of 38,588 acres against retaining the board. Votes are done on a one-vote per acre basis. The vote was not binding and irrigation commissioners went ahead with dissolving the board. It reformed later in the year, but by that time the irrigation project had fallen from control of a locally-run Cooperative Management Entity in which the board had equal input with the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes into the hands of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The compact was renegotiated over the course of 2014.
Irrigators in attendance at the meeting were both in favor of and against the proposal.
Ronan farmer Ken Cornelius said he didn't support the board's proposed resolution.
"I don't want any of my assessment fees used to follow an opinion forward that has nothing to do with what I believe is the approximate 50 percent who disagree with what the board is doing this time," Cornelius said.
"Also, you report that you hired a lobbyist to carry this forward when you haven't decided what you want to say yet. I don't want any of my assessments going to that lobbyist who is going to go to the legislature and argue the opposite of my views."
Irrigator Jack Horner asked the board to wait until the final version of the compact is released before they make a decision on it.
"Maybe we need to know the facts of what the compact does in its final satage," Horner said. "Some things are not known yet."
Irrigator Claudia McCready owns a hardware store in St. Ignatius and said she has seen tribal and non-tribal members split 50-50 on the compact. she has also seen her assessment fees set by the board double to cover costs.
"I would like to see some information al vote go out o that you guys have a clear indication of how the people in your district fee," McCready said. "it's obvious how all of you feel individually. I don't agree with how you feel; and how you feel doesn't always agree with me and how I feel. That doesn't matter. You are here to represent your districts not your personal feelings...Before you spend hundreds of thousands more dollars going forward I think you owe it to your irrigators to fine out exactly how they feel."
John Swenson of Ronan disagreed, and said the commissioners were standing up for the state and federal constitution, even if it was not popular with the irrigators.
"Whether 50 percent or more request you to do somehting different than your resolution, a lot of predictions are being made about what you do and don't know," Swenson said. "I think I can predict that I know that the things you are being requested to do will cause you to violate your oath of office. I would caution anyone against doing that."
Irrigator Gene Erb also backed the board and said those who negotiated the compact had no authority to do so.
"Both entities (state and federal) had no authority doing anything with this water right," Erb said. "The tribal council and the federal government had no right. The only right the federal government had was to maintain and protect our ownership of the ditches and canals that deliver us water."
Jack Lake of Ronan proposed a third option.
"This board is going to have to pick up the pieces whether the compact passes or fails." Lake said. "In my opinion, maybe this board should remain neutral. It just seems like with this resolution you are saying we are going to go to litigation because the compact is done and negotiated...I think this is tearing our community apart."
The board was expected to volte on the measure on Dec. 30.
