Good morning, Charlie!
I have been wondering the very same thing since I got on the board. There has never been much popular interest in board activities, not even enough to support an actual election. What support there has been seems to come more from a desire for development and increased property values than from water quality, and you know me -- I'm a lot more interested in water quality than packing more houses around the lake. The kinds of water quality projects that you and I are interested in, projects that would address what we suspect are the more significant contributors to poor water quality, don't fit with the statutory authority of the board. The water project district IWQC wants to put together would be a much more active and effective mechanism for protecting water quality.
Right now all the Sanitary District appears to do is transfer money from the homeowners to the insurers (our insurance policy feels more like someone's bad practical joke), our lawyer, the newspaper, and the board members. Were we to eliminate that wasted taxing authority and replace it with the taxing authority of a water project district that could actual get things done, my support for the IWQC's efforts would be that much greater.
SDCL 34A-5-53 provides for dissolution of the district by petition to circuit court of a majority of voters within the district. SDCL 34A-5-54 allows the board itself to dissolve the district, but apparently only when the district is annexed into another municipality. If the water project district is considered a municipality, then when it comes into being, we might be able to just vote ourselves out of existence. It might even be possible in that case to transfer our assets to the new water project district. I'm not sure if statute allows us to up and dissolve ourselves whenever we want. Should we ask Jerry for some legal perspective?
If dissolving the district is doable, we might want to do it before the next tax assessment. Then again, we might find it beneficial to wait until the water project district is formed. Either way, I'm interested in pursuing this idea further. I'll be happy to talk with you about further steps we should take.
CAH
I have been wondering the very same thing since I got on the board. There has never been much popular interest in board activities, not even enough to support an actual election. What support there has been seems to come more from a desire for development and increased property values than from water quality, and you know me -- I'm a lot more interested in water quality than packing more houses around the lake. The kinds of water quality projects that you and I are interested in, projects that would address what we suspect are the more significant contributors to poor water quality, don't fit with the statutory authority of the board. The water project district IWQC wants to put together would be a much more active and effective mechanism for protecting water quality.
Right now all the Sanitary District appears to do is transfer money from the homeowners to the insurers (our insurance policy feels more like someone's bad practical joke), our lawyer, the newspaper, and the board members. Were we to eliminate that wasted taxing authority and replace it with the taxing authority of a water project district that could actual get things done, my support for the IWQC's efforts would be that much greater.
SDCL 34A-5-53 provides for dissolution of the district by petition to circuit court of a majority of voters within the district. SDCL 34A-5-54 allows the board itself to dissolve the district, but apparently only when the district is annexed into another municipality. If the water project district is considered a municipality, then when it comes into being, we might be able to just vote ourselves out of existence. It might even be possible in that case to transfer our assets to the new water project district. I'm not sure if statute allows us to up and dissolve ourselves whenever we want. Should we ask Jerry for some legal perspective?
If dissolving the district is doable, we might want to do it before the next tax assessment. Then again, we might find it beneficial to wait until the water project district is formed. Either way, I'm interested in pursuing this idea further. I'll be happy to talk with you about further steps we should take.
CAH
No comments:
Post a Comment