Dear editor:
As mentioned in my letter to the editor of Oct. 20, I was invited to attend the Shoshone Irrigation District (SID) board meeting on Oct. 15. When I arrived, I found that the meeting …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
The Powell Tribune has expanded its online content. To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, or purchase a subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free web account by clicking here.
If you already have a web account, but need to reset it, you can do so by clicking here.
If you would like to purchase a subscription click here.
Please log in to continue |
|
Dear editor:
As mentioned in my letter to the editor of Oct. 20, I was invited to attend the Shoshone Irrigation District (SID) board meeting on Oct. 15. When I arrived, I found that the meeting had been canceled and rescheduled for Nov. 6 at 10 a.m. I returned on Nov. 6 at 9:50 a.m. to be ready to attend the meeting promptly at 10 in order to be respectful of the board’s time. 10:00 a.m. came and went and at 10:15 a.m. with no update on when my meeting would begin, I left as my time was equally important as the SID board and I had other issues to attend to.
While cooling my heels, waiting for the SID board meeting with me to start, I asked the front office if they had any questions regarding my latest request for information. I was informed that they had been ordered not to speak with me at all on any matter and further that they were told not to release any further information to me. My first thought was to wonder what SID was hiding by not releasing the requested information. My next thought was how silly it was to prohibit the front office staff from speaking to me. I am a member of the SID and there are many valid reasons for needing to speak to someone there.
As I left SID without attending the SID board meeting, I remembered Wyoming Statute Title 41, Section 41-7-806. This Statue states “...The books and records be kept at the principal place of business of the district and at reasonable business hours open to be open to public inspection...” I have sent a letter to Mr. Trent Reed reminding him of his apparent legal responsibility to allow me to inspect records on site. I hope to make arrangement to be onsite starting the week of Nov. 18.
I do not have any further information regarding the proposed “First Acre Fee,” but I’m going to guess that is just renaming the current Landowner Fee. This is just a guess on my part. My comment is that no matter what color you paint a skunk, it is still a skunk; and still smells just as bad. We will have to wait and see what we learn going forward.
I continue to wonder why there has been no statement(s) from SID. They have not attempted to explain the reasons for their decision(s) or actions. They have not corrected anything that I may have misstated, just complete silence. This lack of response, in my opinion, reflects poorly on the commissioners. It is as if they don’t care what anyone thinks about SID. SID seems impervious to the thoughts, feelings or input of others.
I have confirmed that the current $300 landowner fee is in fact a fee that is charged just once per landowner. Notwithstanding some misinformation spread that individuals could be charged multiple times; it is an annual fee. What this means is that my original simple analysis that showed that small landowners paid a total of 1,702.6% more than large landowners is completely and 100% correct. You can contact Mr. Trent Reed at SID to double-check me if you like. It is important to keep in mind that I am only speaking about the $300 landowner fee, not any other charges that are billed by SID. Any discussion regarding the total amount paid by the large landowners is not relevant to the discussion surrounding the $300 landowner fee. Of course, it is logical that the more land you own, the more cost you incur. Again, this is not relevant to the objection being voiced regarding the imposition of the unfair landowner fee.
Lastly, I was asked if I knew the fees charged by SID each year are a tax, an irrigation tax, not a simple fee. I did not know this, but I will be contacting the Park County Treasurer’s Office and requesting their help in understanding this matter. It does make a bit of sense to me as we all saw the pages of tax lein notices published in the Powell Tribune a few months ago.
I again strongly suggest if you are concerned about why SID has not joined in this conversation; if you feel that the current $300 landowner fee is wrong and penalizes small landowners and are concerned how much this fee will go up next year; if you are also puzzled, or upset by SID refusing to answer questions; that you and your neighbors must contact your SID commissioner and Mr. Trent Reed and make your voice heard and heard clearly. Request a meeting and take anyone else you know with you. By meeting in groups, we can be respectful of the commissioners’ time. The SID commissioners must understand how everyone feels about this matter.
Rob Stevens
Powell