The Following letter was sent to Attorney General Mark Shurtleff's office earlier today.
January 15, 2010
Mark Shurtleff, Utah Attorney General
Utah State Capitol Complex
350 N. State, Suite 230
P.O. Box 14320
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-2320
Dear Mr. Shurtleff,
I am writing in response to your comments in the Salt Lake Tribune (12/31/09) regarding the work of your office on the SNWA plan to export water from Snake Valley to Las Vegas. You reportedly stated that your office is “just advising – they [Nevada interests] want to work out some agreement. But we’re prepared to litigate if we have to.”
Many of us who oppose the Las Vegas Water Grab wonder how “advising” equates to advocacy for a deeply flawed agreement to give Utah’s permission to Nevada to export more water from the Valley than it can sustain without unacceptable consequences. Certainly, your office has advocated for that agreement. Forgive us if we fail to understand what you mean by litigating in the future if you “have to” when you have thus far shown no inclination to litigate to protect the legal rights of Utah citizens from this Water Grab.
Specifically, your office failed to litigate to protect the due process rights of Utah successors in interest to Snake Valley water rights holders, or those who moved to the Utah side of the valley after the close of the protest period in 1990. When that case was pursued to the Nevada Supreme Court by lawyers representing affected individuals and organizations, you made no effort to assist or file briefs in support of that pending appeal. Your office did not object to the decision of the federal agencies – BLM, NPS, FWS, BIA – to drop their protests of SNWA applications in Spring, Cave, Dry Lake, and Delamar Valleys in favor of stipulated agreements when the impacts of those water withdrawals will affect Utah’s environment and water rights holders. Rather, your office supports a similar Utah-Nevada stipulated agreement in Snake Valley to avoid litigating this to the U.S. Supreme Court, where this issue will wind up in due time. Should the federal agencies again “stipulate out” of their protests of the Snake Valley applications, is your office prepared to challenge legally those decisions?
We further note your apparent unwillingness to take legal action to protect Utah citizens’ rights from oppressive federal actions like the premature USDOE shipments of depleted Uranium to EnergySolutions and to demand that an Environmental Impact Statement be completed prior to approval and construction of the massive new National Security Agency electronic eavesdropping/spy complex at Camp Williams. Such inaction erodes your credibility in defending Utah interests vis a vis the “feds”, your histrionics about the supposed unconstitutionality of the proposed health care reform legislation notwithstanding.
Perhaps you could redeem yourself on the Water Grab front by filing a friend of the court brief on behalf of the plaintiffs whose win in the Cave, Dry Lake and Delmar Valleys case is being appealed by SNWA to the Nevada Supreme Court. Or by preparing to challenge the adequacy of the environmental impact statement on the SNWA groundwater development project later this year. Or by examining the legal options to challenge the cloud seeding in the Ruby Mountains that SNWA is funding.
These suggestions may not rise to the level of “have to”, but were you to take action on any of them it would be more appropriate and less expensive than bringing a grandstanding case on health care reform.
Sincerely,
Steve Erickson
Policy Analyst, Citizens Education Project
No comments:
Post a Comment