Water wars on the Wasatch

Group to look into Salt Lake's use of surplus contracts

Return To Article

Commenting has temporarily been suspended in preparation for our new website launch, which is planned for the week of August 12th. When the new site goes live, we will also launch our new commenting platform. Thank you for your patience while we make these changes.

  • hikeswithdogs Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 17, 2017 4:21 p.m.

    No water no more development......what is there not to understand?

    As humans we can't just keep on expanding indefinitely, for gods sake we live on the edge of a desert.

  • scrappy do DRAPER, UT
    Oct. 17, 2017 11:25 a.m.

    our SLC forefathers were smart and conservative... our new Republican brand are self serving, ruthless and frankly, dinosaurs near extinction.... sounds like a contract is a contract is a contract... good for SLC

  • JMutt Park City, UT
    Oct. 17, 2017 7:38 a.m.

    The other limited resource in these areas is land. How much development are we going to allow for private homes? Handfuls of access points are being posted as "private" and "No Trespassing" because some person owns the land off the road and now feels entitled to everything beyond it.

    The canyons are to be enjoyed by the public.

    Admittedly I have limited knowledge on water rights but, from reading this article it sounds like Salt Lake City found a way to manage over development in the canyons.

  • stevo123 Driggs, ID
    Oct. 16, 2017 8:45 p.m.

    Is this Mike Noel going to bat for the "dry" lot owners?

  • Red Smith American Fork, UT
    Oct. 16, 2017 7:47 p.m.

    SLC is a great city with a very poor public utilities dept.

    Cities can't hold water longer than 40 years, but it's been 41 years that so-called "surplus" water has been illegally sold.

    SLC Public Utilities operates a $25 million "surplus" water business whereby it able to charge a water hoarding tax on cities in 3 counties.

    Park City, Heber Valley , Alta, Millcreek, Cottonwood Heights, and cabin owners in the canyons all pay a SLC water hoarding tax.

    SLC terminated a water contract for legal advantage in Shrontz v SLC and Alta make Mr. Guldner's statement false.

    The issue is water Independence for all cities.

    Hoarding so much water that new cities are forced onto "surplus" water contract is against the law and good water policy.

    Protecting the watershed means unlimited Public development for 3 million tourists in Big Cottonwood Canyon while squeezing out the small canyon land owner by monopolizing a shared state water resource.

    Water must not be weaponized against farmers, home builders, and private property owners as Salt Lake City has.

    SLC also has watershed police powers overlaying 5 counties under 10-8-15.

    It's time for change and better water policies.