There are many positive aspects of the plan, but it still boils down to Metro Atlanta gets to take what it wants and the rest of state gets what left.
The Rome News-Tribune has an article about concerns that the Greater Rome Chamber of Commerce, Rome and Floyd County governments have over the proposed statewide water management plan and interbasin transfers.
Joe Cook, executive director of the Coosa River Basin Initiative, said: "The idea of the plan is good, and there are many positive aspects. But it still boils down to Metro Atlanta gets to take what it wants and the rest of the state gets what’s left."
_______________
And The Albany Herald Editorial Board writes:
The Albany area — indeed, Southwest Georgia — is blessed in that it is located over aquifers that supply our homes, farms, businesses and industries with a critical resource — clean water.
Long before Albany shelved the moniker in favor of the “Good Life City,” it was known as the Artesian City.
What has residents on our end of the state concerned is whether an Atlanta region bursting at the seams and surpassing the infrastructure and resources to support its continued expansion will fill its water trough at the expense of other regions of the state. Concern over whether metro Atlanta would take water from Southwest Georgia is decades old, but the tremendous drought that plagued much of the Southeast in 2007 added more fuel to it.
The state water council’s plan, three years in the making and expected to cost $36 million over the next three years, was met with plaudits from the state’s top three political movers and shakers — Gov. Sonny Perdue, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and House Speaker Glenn Richardson. Perdue insists that this, Georgia’s first statewide water management plan, is not a veiled attempt to grab water from Georgia’s less populous communities and send it to slake the ever-increasing thirst of a rapidly growing metro region.
But there is an unleveled playing field created in the plan. Instead of having water districts that follow water resources, the plan is heavier toward following political boundaries. Under the plan, Georgia cannot alter the border of the 16-county metro Atlanta water planning district, which gives those counties upstream control of a several river basins, including the Chattahoochee and Flint.
Metro Atlanta is the state’s premier economic engine, one that is expected to gain more and more population — and more and more political clout. But Georgia cannot be allowed to turn into a state where other regions are strip-mined of their resources to sustain Atlanta. Georgia leaders have to start planning for a Georgia in which growth is directed toward these other regions, too. The result will be a more united Georgia instead of two distinctly different Georgias where one is suspiciously watching the other.
_______________
As I understand the situation, the General Assembly will get the proposed plan this coming Monday and will have 20 days to make changes before its automatic adoption.
Joe Cook, executive director of the Coosa River Basin Initiative, said: "The idea of the plan is good, and there are many positive aspects. But it still boils down to Metro Atlanta gets to take what it wants and the rest of the state gets what’s left."
_______________
And The Albany Herald Editorial Board writes:
The Albany area — indeed, Southwest Georgia — is blessed in that it is located over aquifers that supply our homes, farms, businesses and industries with a critical resource — clean water.
Long before Albany shelved the moniker in favor of the “Good Life City,” it was known as the Artesian City.
What has residents on our end of the state concerned is whether an Atlanta region bursting at the seams and surpassing the infrastructure and resources to support its continued expansion will fill its water trough at the expense of other regions of the state. Concern over whether metro Atlanta would take water from Southwest Georgia is decades old, but the tremendous drought that plagued much of the Southeast in 2007 added more fuel to it.
The state water council’s plan, three years in the making and expected to cost $36 million over the next three years, was met with plaudits from the state’s top three political movers and shakers — Gov. Sonny Perdue, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and House Speaker Glenn Richardson. Perdue insists that this, Georgia’s first statewide water management plan, is not a veiled attempt to grab water from Georgia’s less populous communities and send it to slake the ever-increasing thirst of a rapidly growing metro region.
But there is an unleveled playing field created in the plan. Instead of having water districts that follow water resources, the plan is heavier toward following political boundaries. Under the plan, Georgia cannot alter the border of the 16-county metro Atlanta water planning district, which gives those counties upstream control of a several river basins, including the Chattahoochee and Flint.
Metro Atlanta is the state’s premier economic engine, one that is expected to gain more and more population — and more and more political clout. But Georgia cannot be allowed to turn into a state where other regions are strip-mined of their resources to sustain Atlanta. Georgia leaders have to start planning for a Georgia in which growth is directed toward these other regions, too. The result will be a more united Georgia instead of two distinctly different Georgias where one is suspiciously watching the other.
_______________
As I understand the situation, the General Assembly will get the proposed plan this coming Monday and will have 20 days to make changes before its automatic adoption.
posted by Sid Cottingham | 10:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home