Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

WATER: Availability should be proven

Letter by George Robison, Gig Harbor on June 9, 2011 at 2:28 pm with 3 Comments »
June 9, 2011 3:07 pm

Re: “Knight‘s water war with Yelm is one worth fighting” (editorial, 6-9).

Although I take no position regarding the JZ Knight lawsuit, proof of ability to provide water should be a burden that developers need to meet before a city or county can approve a plan. That should be done by either proving that wells can be drilled or by a certificate from a water provider that supplies will meet demand.

I developed many parcels in a different state, and always had to prove water before getting final approval from the local agency. It is common sense. To do otherwise is unfair to prospective buyers of the parcels to be developed.

Leave a comment Comments → 3
  1. There was a time, not too many years ago, where if a landowner wanted to take out a loan to build a house they had to prove there was an adequate supply of water.

    Then the party that cannot be named decided governments should not interfere in private business and stopped regulating banks and other lending institutions.

  2. theglovesRoff says:

    For the love of he who shall not be named, give it a rest xring.

    You sound like a scorned woman,

    or an xtp sumner troll………..

  3. gloves bump you

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0