The aldermen are going to have to take it to the streets, literally. Open houses and letters to the editor are all great. But they need to do what they should have done last March and go door-to-door to explain it to the people. Yes, it means campaigning as if they are running for re-election because, in a way, they are.

They need to explain to their constituents why they believe Great Lakes water is the only option, why the mayor is not only wrong but completely unhinged, what the next step of the application process is, and what the outcome will be if the mayor has his way.

(As this would be a purely educational and non-political exercise, there is really no reason why the Chamber of Commerce couldn’t supply the aldermen with the information brochures they need to help explain the issue.)

Because if they don’t get out and explain the issues involved to the residents, if the mayor forces the council to take drastic action, or if a recall election actually becomes necessary next spring, the aldermen will not be able to rely on the community to support them.

They should get out there now before everyone’s attention becomes too focused on the elections this fall and the Common Council’s message gets drowned out.

The mayor has basically made it a choice between him and Lake Michigan water. If enough public pressure is brought to bear on the issue, then perhaps the mayor will back down from this intolerable position. If not, at least the Common Council members and the other leaders in this community will feel more confident that they have the backing of an informed community in whatever next steps they are forced to take.

That application is on hold at the moment for several reasons, most of them involving details on which the DNR wants more information. The city should work out those details to the state’s satisfaction. But in putting the application on hold, the DNR also cited Scrima’s objections to the application.

The application is based on more than a decade of study. The process of putting together the application was as open as any other such process; informational meetings were held for the public, the issue was discussed and decided in meetings that were open to the public.

Scrima’s objections are based on a hunch – he calls it common sense – and a shadowy conspiracy theory that questions the motives of those who have conducted past studies and who would make decisions about the future. He also has failed to back up his doubts with a single formal resolution asking for reconsideration or for a new study.

We don’t buy it. When the studies were launched, all options were on the table; those options were considered and narrowed to the one that seems to offer the best solution: Lake Michigan water. Scrima talks about other options, but those were already considered and rejected because they were believed to be more expensive or not sustainable in the long term. They also would require other Waukesha neighbors to accommodate the city. Whatever the answer, Waukesha will not be able to do this without help.

If in studying the matter, the DNR determines that Lake Michigan water isn’t the best answer for Waukesha, it should reject the application. But it should do so because of sound science, not the “common sense” of Jeff Scrima.

I’d like to mention about the water situation in the city of Waukesha. I think that Mayor Scrima is doing a good job. He’s looking at all the options on the table. Now, there’s reports that if Waukesha takes the Milwaukee water, they have to have so many minorities come out here and they have to have low-cost housing and pay for this. Is this in the fine print of one of the perks in order to accept the water from Milwaukee? I’d like to see that full detail, contract printed in the paper. No. 2, I don’t think New Berlin is satisfied with the deal they have with Milwaukee water because their prices are going up 60 percent. I am not saying that that won’t eventually come down to that but I think we should look at all of the other options and see what other perks are given just to get the Milwaukee water out here, because once they get the Milwaukee water out here, they are going to continue to raise the prices. I think the mayor is trying to look at all the other options. So give him an chance and see. Did the other Common Council members talk to these other people that have the Milwaukee water and see if they are happy and what the cost is and what the problems they had?
(Editor’s note: Milwaukee Common Council Resolution 080457 says that negotiations for water sales can commence after the Legislative Reference Bureau supplies the city with information about the buying community’s “tax rate, assessed valuation per capita, median household income, per capita income and median home value … (and) poverty rates, minority representation and other demographic and community characteristic data it finds to be pertinent … (and) the current status and an analysis of past and future trends relating to the availability of public transportation and affordable housing.” There is no requirement regarding minorities moving to Waukesha. Waukesha Water Utility General Manager Dan Duchniak has said the city’s application for a Great Lakes water diversion takes into account the anticipated rate increases for Milwaukee water. There is, as of yet, no signed contract regarding water sales from Milwaukee to Waukesha.)

What minorities are they concerned about? The Irish? Democrats?

I don’t think this represents the views of most of those opposed to a diversion from Lake Michigan for Waukesha’s long-term water needs. However, if there is an undercurrent of racist paranoia, Mayor Jeff Scrima and his supporters would do well to condemn it quickly.

Scrima’s drama on water more like science fiction

Waukesha residents got more than they had bargained for in April’s election. As the local blog Spring City Chronicle commented recently, a vote for Jeff Scrima was a vote for less drama in the mayor’s office. They were sadly mistaken.

What drama! The mayor had the sense of it when he delayed for an entire week making a decision on whether to sign a letter to the DNR. It said Lake Michigan was Waukesha’s only option for a long-term solution to Waukesha’s water problems.

Surely when Scrima’s op-ed appeared in The Freeman, after a conspiracy-filled two-part interview, it was inevitable that Scrima would not sign the letter. But the mayor clung to the dramatic moment a couple of days more until he could release his own letter to the DNR saying that somehow, someway Waukesha would find an alternative to Lake Michigan water.

I’m on the edge of my seat waiting to see what he will do next. Will he invite the press along on a nature hike where he will somehow divine a new source for water? Will he strike a rock at a quarry causing water to spring forth? Perhaps he will call a psychic hotline?

We know he has no actual science on which to base his decisions. All of the relevant people with expertise in this field have looked at Scrima’s proposed solutions and dismissed them entirely.

Ah, but we do have Mother Goose to comfort us, tales of Little Red Riding Hood to scare the children of Waukesha to stay away from an evil cabal of business interests and city bureaucrats. Throw in a few interested elected officials such as Waukesha County Executive Dan Vrakas and the members of the Waukesha Common Council, and we have nightmares aplenty for young and old alike.

It’s hard to take such a man seriously but unfortunately we must. So long as Scrima is in office as mayor he will oppose Waukesha’s application for Lake Michigan water. So long as the mayor of Waukesha opposes the city’s application for Lake Michigan water, the Department of Natural Resources and the Great Lakes states will not accept Waukesha’s application, even if the Common Council renders Scrima’s office as impotent as Mayor McCheese.

Give the council credit for trying. City Administrator Lori Luther controls costs as much as the Common Council will let her. She’s even negotiated zero increases with the city’s unions two years in a row. Given a choice between a good city administrator and an increasingly erratic and irrational mayor, the Common Council chose the city administrator.

Contrary to what some believe, the city administrator has always been more important than the mayor. The argument that the mayor should be more important was lost three years ago when Luther was hired. The Common Council merely codified it last week, and in doing so revealed their assessment of our new mayor.

Scrima’s remaining supporters tell us that expressing his “grassy knoll” visions are really an articulation of his electoral mandate.

Election results are nebulous things to read. It’s a bad year for Democratic incumbents. If Scrima’s predecessor was identified with anything for four years, it was close ties to the Democratic Party. It’s worth noting that while Scrima won in a landslide, his landslide was not nearly as great as the other Republican vs. Democrat contest, Mark Gundrum’s victory over Richard Congdon for judge.

It’s also worth remembering the other issue in the race was the perceived lack of professionalism by the incumbent. If only a referendum could be held on the mayor’s professionalism now.

The drama! We forget now but Scrima actually supported the council’s decision to approve the application for Great Lakes water. That followed a campaign that saw a gradual weakening of his stance against Lake Michigan water.

It might be worth asking Scrima what sudden vision revealed to him the great water conspiracy and how it caused him to renew his opposition.

How much time can we spare for the play? The city’s water commission told us they only had an 18-month cushion built into the plan, a blink of an eye in government work.

We need fewer nursery rhymes, fewer boogeyman stories, and more adult leadership – soon.

Unfortunately, the adults aren’t in charge, Scrima is.

(James Wigderson is a blogger publishing at http://www.wigderson.com and a Waukesha resident. His column runs Thursdays in The Freeman.)

JAMES WIGDERSON

How is he stopping the application, you may ask. After all, the Common Council (with Scrima’s blessing, I hasten to add) voted 15-1 to apply for Great Lakes Water. Yet the mayor has backed away from his earlier support for the application, informing the state Department of Natural Resources that Waukesha is continuing to pursue other options for water. As long as there is the possibility of other options, the DNR and the Great Lakes states will not consider an application for diversion. The application cannot go forward even if the Common Council (also elected representatives of the city) vote over and over again to re-affirm their belief that Waukesha must have a pipeline to Lake Michigan, whether it’s through Milwaukee, Oak Creek or Racine.

Despite all of the science supporting the decision, despite the Common Council’s near-unanimous support for Great Lakes water, despite a poll indicating public support for Great Lakes water and general distrust of the mayor’s knowledge of the situation, despite the public criticism and the general appearance of foolishness, Mayor Scrima continues to hold firm, as evidenced by this article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, his op-ed piece in the Waukesha Freeman, and his letter to the DNR.

It’s worth noting that none of the alternatives proposed by the mayor have any merit, and that they have all been studied before being discarded. Shallow wells to the west will not only prove more costly but will also directly affect the local surface water features. You think the Vernon Marsh needs protecting now, wait until a half dozen more straws are stuck in the ground nearby.

That’s if the local communities don’t put up a legal challenge. Don’t think for a moment that all eyes are not on the Town of Waukesha where two Town Supervisors, Robert Tallinger Sr. and Stephen Smart are up for recall on July 13th because of their votes concerning land that will be used for City of Waukesha wells. (Not that I have any sympathy for them. Both of them should be recalled for their role in the Walgreens affair: Smart for breaking his word about not voting because of a conflict of interest, and Tallinger for going along with Smart.)

The wells are for emergency use, according to plan, and not even full-time use. Imagine the outrage over wells that would be used to dilute the water from the aquifer full-time.

Meanwhile the mayor hopes to spring water from a rock like Moses and fill up the local quarries as reservoirs. Never mind that they are in use currently, the water discharged feeds the Fox River, the water is contaminated, the cost is too high, and the water would be in even greater danger of other contaminations.

But the mayor assures us that so long as rain falls from the sky (yes, he actually said that), Waukesha will have water. It’s crackpotism on the scale of announcing that he knows the real conspiracy behind who killed Kennedy, and it’s convenient that the mayor sees conspiracies among those who would support a diversion of Lake Michigan water to Waukesha. Let’s see, so far we have former Mayor Larry Nelson, the Milwaukee Common Council, SEWRPC, Dan Warren, Dan Vrakas, Dan Duchniak, Waukesha County Director of Parks and Land Use Dale Shaver, Lori Luther, the Sustainable Water Supply Coalition, the entire Waukesha Common Council, the Waukesha County Board, the Waukesha Freeman, every business interest in Waukesha, business interests outside of Waukesha, construction and engineering companies, Mother Goose, the Milwaukee 7, Milwaukee Common Council President Willie Hines and the opinion writers at the Waukesha Freeman. After today, include Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Patrick McIlheran and the Journal Sentinel editorial board. I wonder who among them stole the strawberries?

The mayor’s behavior is putting the city in a difficult spot.

The mayor’s supporters argue that the mayor was elected to stop Waukesha from getting Lake Michigan water. This is not the case. The mayor originally campaigned on such a platform but then backed away from it during the course of the election to the point where, when he took office, he endorsed the Council’s decision to pursue Lake Michigan water. In muddying the waters (pun intended) he prevented a clear mandate for himself on the issue.

However, it’s worth noting that in many ways the election was symptomatic of the general anti-incumbency mood of the electorate, especially anti-Democratic incumbents. Scrima’s predecessor was widely seen as an anomaly, a Democratic mayor in the heart of Waukesha. Even then, Scrima’s vote total in the City of Waukesha was less than Republican Mark Gundrum who defeated Democrat Richard Congdon for judge. If anything, the water issue and Scrima’s erratic behavior during the campaign ate into his vote totals. Scrima was saved from even lower vote totals by the questions concerning Mayor Larry Nelson’s professionalism, specifically his attire. (Imagine if the election were held today on the issue of professionalism.) While one can’t ignore the margins by which Scrima won, he has certainly misread his mandate. As the Spring City Chronicle put it so well, the desire for Scrima was a desire for less drama, not more.

Still, mandate or no, the DNR elevated Scrima’s fruitless search for alternative water sources to the point where his approval is now necessary for the process of seeking approval for Lake Michigan water to continue. It is highly unlikely Scrima will change his mind, and it may be too late if he did. But as long as Scrima is mayor, it’s highly unlikely the DNR and the Great Lakes States will consider Waukesha’s water application.

The city is left with few choices.

It can abandon any hope of getting Lake Michigan water. This is really no option.

The Common Council can remove Scrima from office. That choice is difficult and dangerous. It’s not as if Scrima has committed a crime. Even phasing out the position of mayor would likely take too long. The public is not far enough along yet to put up with removing Scrima from office. Much more education of the public needs to be done.

We could have a recall election. This can’t even begin until April when Scrima will have been in office for one year. By then, Scrima could do even more damage to the possibility of getting Lake Michigan water. However, it would give the aldermen and business leaders a chance to educate the public about the water issue and how Scrima is just wrong on the issue.

Another possibility is pushing the issue to referendum. That would require the aldermen to actually get out into the community and explain their vote for the Great Lakes Water application. If the recent poll is correct, then the aldermen already have a head start. If the recent poll’s results were faulty, then the aldermen should be out there anyway convincing the public. By reaching out to the public, the aldermen would get the public’s buy-in at the same time they would send a clear message to the DNR of Waukesha’s commitment to seeking Lake Michigan water. The downside of the approach is that if the referendum fails, it would preclude any possibility of ever getting Lake Michigan water. The reward, a clear mandate for Lake Michigan water, might not outweigh the risk, especially if Scrima were to ignore the results and continue to speak out against Lake Michigan water. (Although if he lost a referendum fight, how long could he continue in office?) The upside is that Waukesha could settle the matter quickly. There is even time to get the measure on the September primary ballot.

“Something” must be done soon. The city’s water commission estimates we only have an 18 month cushion to solve this crisis. That’s not a lot of time for government work. Unfortunately the adults are not in charge, Scrima is.

Waukesha’s application for a Great Lakes water supply is consistent with the findings of the commission’s preliminary regional water supply plan, SEWRPC Executive Director Ken Yunker says in a letter to representatives of the Sustainable Water Supply Coalition.

An advisory committee, which included engineers, scientists, water utility managers and other water experts throughout the region, studied possible options for four years before selecting a Lake Michigan supply for Waukesha, according to Yunker. The advisory committee did not recommend continued use of deep or shallow wells, or a combination of wells drawing water from deep and shallow aquifers.

The commission letter was distributed to city officials Monday in an attempt to build support for restarting state review of Waukesha’s application, coalition executive director Brian Nemoir said.

“City officials need assurance that all possible options have been studied,” Nemoir said.

The commission letter came in response to a request by four coalition members for SEWRPC to confirm its water supply recommendation for Waukesha. The representatives are: Ed Olson, president of Waukesha Memorial Hospital; Joel Quadracci, chairman, president and CEO of Quad/Graphics; Suzanne Kelley, president of the Waukesha County Chamber of Commerce; and Steve Baas, government relations director for the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce.

The coalition also is working with the Waukesha County Chamber of Commerce on an online petition drive asking the Waukesha Common Council to reaffirm its choice of Lake Michigan as the only reasonable option for the city. Petitions are to be presented to the Common Council during its meeting Tuesday.

Meanwhile, a state appeals court is ordering the DNR to review a well permit because the well might affect Lake Beulah.

A state appeals court has ordered the Department of Natural Resources to reconsider a 2005 permit the agency granted to East Troy for constructing a high capacity well that has been operating for nearly two years 1,400 feet from Lake Beulah in Walworth County.

Lake Beulah Management District attorney Dean Laing said the ruling provides traction for the district’s effort to shut down the well to prevent a drop in the lake’s water level.

The ruling’s impact will be felt statewide since this is the first court to hold that the DNR has general authority to review the environmental impacts of high capacity wells of less than 2 million gallons a day, Laing said.

The court is telling the DNR it can invoke its authority to protect the waters of the state, under the Wisconsin Constitution’s public trust doctrine, if it receives information about possible environmental damage, Laing said. This authority remains with the DNR even though separate state laws mandate environmental impact studies for high capacity wells of that size in specific circumstances, he said.

“The DNR’s mission must be to protect waters of the state from potential threats caused by unsustainable levels of groundwater being withdrawn by a well, whatever type of well that may be,” the Waukesha-based District II appeals court says in a June 16 ruling. The public trust doctrine says that the state holds title to navigable waters in trust for public purposes.

So much for the idea that Waukesha can just go dig some new shallow wells to the west. As it has been pointed out by me and others, the shallow wells will affect the local surface water features nearby. As this ruling reminds us, that simply will not be allowed to happen.

State Department of Natural Resources Secretary Matthew Frank told Mayor Jeff Scrima Wednesday in a letter that the department will not begin reviewing Waukesha’s application for a Great Lakes water supply until the mayor and other city officials stop their search for other possible sources.

A 2008 Great Lakes protection compact requires a municipality seeking lake water to demonstrate “there is no reasonable water supply alternative” other than the lakes, Frank says in the letter.

Though the city’s application documents repeatedly state that lake water is the only sustainable water supply option available to Waukesha, the mayor has publicly stated his preference to continue evaluating other options, such as more wells, the Fox River and even continuing to remove radium from water pumped out of deep wells in a sandstone aquifer.

“The city must confirm that Great Lakes water is in fact the only long term sustainable water option,” Frank says in the letter.

The Common Council approved submitting the application on April 8 and it was delivered to the DNR on May 20. Scrima, however, criticized a Great Lakes application in his successful campaign for mayor. He was elected April 6, defeating first-term mayor Larry Nelson, who championed the Great Lakes application.

Okay, they want Waukesha to confirm there is no alternative. Since the only “alternative” is to drill shallow wells to the west, let’s remind ourselves why that won’t work:
1) The wells will affect the nearby surface water features. I don’t think the DNR will like that.
2) Given the reaction from the Town of Waukesha to us drilling one well near them, imagine what all of Waukesha’s neighbors will do when we start drilling near them. How fast will they run to the legislature and the DNR for relief? Might as well build the pipeline now.
3) Oh yeah, even if one and two weren’t insurmountable obstacles, we can expect more regulation from the legislature, the DNR and the EPA in the future about water quality.
4) Even if we turn a blind eye to points 1-3, drilling those wells will still cost more. And the more you try to avoid affecting the surface bodies of water and other communities, the more you have to spread out the wells. That will increase the costs and annoy more of Waukesha’s neighbors.

Okay, what about some other options?
1) We could try the radium-pellet-producing process. Of course, what do you do with the waste? I suggest storing it in the unused rooms in Mayor Jeff Scrima’s home.
2) Oh yeah, that won’t work in the long run either because the legislature is considering a law that would require communities to replenish the aquifers they draw from. I guess we’ll be building a pipeline to Jefferson County. Hey, that will be inexpensive, right?
3) We could try more conservation. Let’s see, we already have some of the most “progressive” water policies and conservation measures in the state. Not only will we run into the law of diminishing returns, but we’ll make life too difficult for Waukesha’s few industrial production companies. That may suit some anti-Waukesha fanatics on the East Side of Milwaukee. It should not be good enough for the people of Waukesha, their mayor, and most reasonable people.
4) We could just let our city dry up and blow away. We wouldn’t be the first ghost town, and we won’t be the last.

“The Forbidden Zone was once a paradise. Your breed made a desert of it, ages ago.”

No, I don’t like that idea, either. Fortunately, the Great Lakes Compact allows for diversions just so we can avoid such a scenario.

At least it looks like the DNR is just asking for the City of Waukesha to say, gee, there is no other option other than Lake Michigan. Okay, the city council meets Tuesday. They should vote to send the application back to the DNR with a note attached saying that there is no other option for water.

And then it’s time for Mayor Jeff Scrima to turn to some of his supporters and say, “Okay, for the good of the city, I’m willing to support the application. I will stop trying to have it both ways. I will give the application my full support.”

Ponce De Leon searched Florida without success for the Fountain of Youth. Scrima should spare himself the trouble.

Mayor not the only one allowed to talk to strangers

(James Wigderson is a blogger publishing at http://www.wigderson.com and a Waukesha resident. His column runs Thursdays in The Freeman.)

I have a confession to make. Last Saturday I attended the Republican Party of Wisconsin’s state convention in Milwaukee. I didn’t even notify Mayor Jeff Scrima. I just went ahead and did it.

Even worse, I talked to people at all levels of government. Some of them worked in the state Legislature, some of them worked in the state attorney general’s office, and some were candidates for federal office. I even spoke to two candidates for governor, and one of them is from Milwaukee.

I also spoke to a mayor of a city on a Great Lake. OK, it was the mayor of Superior, Dave Ross, who is running for lieutenant governor, but who knows where Waukesha will get its water?

A funny thing happened. The world did not come to an end. The Fox River did not dry up. A plague of locusts did not descend on the Moor Downs golf course. Frame Park was not suddenly turned into a high-speed rail hub.

I actually learned a few things. Mostly I learned that people outside the city can’t wait to hear what our mayor will do next.

Did he really tape record a meeting with the city attorney and the city administrator, I was asked. Usually the person asking me rolled their eyes like it was the silliest thing they ever heard.

I had to confess it was the silliest thing I’ve heard this year, and I followed the story of Democratic Assembly Speaker Mike Sheridan explaining how his relationship with a lobbyist had nothing to do with how he treated a bill in the Legislature.

Yes, I explained, Mayor Scrima really did record the meeting. “But you’ll be happy to know he doesn’t think it’s newsworthy,” I told them.

“So far nobody has claimed yet that the mayor has an enemies list, although it is fair to say he is supported by a lot of (water softener) plumbers,” I added cheerfully.

“At least you’ll have plenty to write about,” was the most popular reply.

Which may explain why the mayor was not too fond of the idea of aldermen venturing east of 124th street and speaking to some of their counterparts. Aside from being away from the mayor’s recording devices (although not the FBI’s, as many have pointed out), who knows what they said about him as they conspired?

Scrima’s reaction, of course, was silly. People from local governments talk to each other all the time. Sometimes formally, sometimes not. It’s something to be encouraged rather than discouraged.

We even forget how talking to other local governments is a built-in feature around here. When Alderman Rick Tortomasi talks to County Supervisor Jean Tortomasi, should he ask the mayor’s permission first? When County Supervisor and Alderman Duane Paulson or County Supervisor and Alderman Kathy Cummings write themselves a note, should they run it past the mayor to make sure the city of Waukesha is speaking with one voice?

When Mayor Scrima speaks to the one public member of his team of smart people, should he notify the council he spoke with the City of Pewaukee government?

Protesting when some Waukesha aldermen dare to take it upon themselves to see what the Milwaukee aldermen think of the idea of selling us water is just counterproductive. It’s not like the aldermen broke the embargo of Cuba. More contacts between Milwaukee and Waukesha now just might mean easier negotiations later.

Instead of complaining, the mayor should have said, “Great. Let me know what you hear and whether it is worth our time to negotiate with Milwaukee. Next time, invite them to Waukesha.”

I know the complaint that the mayor was elected in a landslide. But the aldermen were elected, too, and sometimes they have minds of their own.

Perhaps someone among the really smart people advising the mayor can convince him to take a deep breath, relax for a moment, and figure out how he’s going to work with the Common Council going forward. That means putting away the recording devices, not issuing orders to the Common Council president, and working through the committee system.

Because the alternative is for the Common Council to run the city without the mayor. It’s up to him.

JAMES WIGDERSON

First, a week ago, eight Milwaukee aldermen penned Scrima a letter in the socalled name of “regional cooperation.” What it really translated to was: You better do it our way or else we will put a stick in your eye. Although the aldermen seemed to be reacting to Scrima’s own somewhat hyperbolic campaign rhetoric on Lake Michigan water, they filled their own letter with – you guessed it – hyperbolic rhetoric.

For example, they expressed upset that Scrima, during his campaign, had called Milwaukee a “sinking ship” that is “rampant with financial and behavior problems.” What does this have to do with Milwaukee water issues? Now, I wouldn’t call Milwaukee a sinking ship at all. I think a lot of things are going well in Milwaukee. There are also things to criticize there, of course, and Scrima has every right to do so. Milwaukee officials should set aside their bruised egos and deal with the issues on the table, not old, meaningless rhetoric.

I suppose that’s true about both sides. Scrima did run a campaign aimed at beating up on Milwaukee and playing on people’s anti-Milwaukee fears. So, perhaps the common agreement could start here:

Waukesha officials could acknowledge that Milwaukee is a nice city in a lot of ways (you don’t agree? Go see the Raphael at the Art Museum, as one example of a nice thing in Milwaukee). They could also agree that all of its officials aren’t tax-hikers or corrupt and all of its residents aren’t engaged in lives of crime.

Milwaukee officials could, in turn, acknowledge that the suburbs aren’t just filled with polluting racists.

There. Was that so tough? Personally, I like both cities in different ways.

Both sides could also acknowledge that neither side has an obligation to give the other side something, although, in the case of Lake Michigan, it’s a public resource (and treasure) that’s not owned by anyone. Both sides are obligated to protect the welfare of their own constituents first, and this is not a bad thing. Both sides should protect the environment. And regional cooperation is just an empty buzzword that people toss around when they aren’t getting their way.

If Milwaukee officials are really interested in seeing where common ground with Scrima exists on the water question, they might have simply asked to have a personal meeting with him. Instead, their letter reminded him that, to get Lake Michigan water, Waukesha would have to agree to an industry non-compete clause and an economic compensation payment. Scratch that, it demanded such. It was written with all of the finesse and cooperative tone one might expect from Tony Soprano.

I think it was a poor way to introduce Scrima to the concept of regional cooperation, if that was the authors’ intent. It looks to Scrima’s constituents like an attempt to strong-arm him into backing down on campaign pledges and paints him into a corner.

I can almost picture how the water negotiations are going to go. Picture a quiet room over at Waukesha State Bank, a group of men seated around a long table with Mayor Jeff Scrima at the head of the table, saying of his Milwaukee counterpart, “He must let us draw the water from the lake. Certainly he can — present a bill for such services; after all — we are not Communists.”

Candidate for mayor Jeff Scrima has been touting a plan to avoid looking for water elsewhere by planning to use wells, the Fox River and nearby quarries. Scrima’s plan got a thorough examination thanks to Alderman Paul Ybarra, and it’s $32 million more than getting water from Lake Michigan.

Nelson pointed out that Scrima’s alternative is the more expensive than the three options proposed by the city after years of research.

“I think there is some significant facts in this study,” Nelson said. “What Mr. Scrima has been publicly proposing would cost taxpayers $32 million more than the Lake Michigan option that we have been suggesting.”

The city has been studying the future water supply for eight years, Duchniak said, and determined the cheapest option would be Lake Michigan.

Due to a drawdown in the city’s groundwater source, the city is faced with declining quality and quantity. The more the city pulls from the deep aquifer, the more the water needs to be treated for contaminants.

The city is ordered to remove radium from its water supply by June 2018, and it is working on a timetable to develop the future water supply. The Common Council is expected to make a decision about the city’s water supply option in late 2010.

If the city chooses the Lake Michigan option, the city has an 18-month window after the projected construction completion date to meet the radium deadline.

Next Scrima will suggest we start storing water in mineshafts.

Of course, none of the planning takes into account how much the neighboring communities will fight Waukesha when, as predicted, the extra straws Waukesha sticks in the ground start to affect the surface bodies of water. Not every community will roll over like the Town of Waukesha did recently. When the wells start to run dry and Pewaukee Lake becomes Pewaukee Puddle, what kind of costs will all those lawsuits bring?

Some issues are just too important for politicians to play games with. It’s nice that Scrima wants to be liked and tells everyone want they want to hear, but it doesn’t mean we have to believe him.