Budget approved for district

The proposed budget for the Owl Creek Irrigation District was approved by Judge Robert E. Skar on Monday, June 27.

The budget calls for itemizing money to be raised by assessment against lands in the amount of $138,017.18 which is by assessment of $21.81 per acre against 4,378.89 acres of land in the Lower Area or Lucerne and Dempsey Areas at $4.58 per acre on 9,286.17 acres of land comprising the Upper and Middle Areas of the district. With this income and with income from other sources, the total proposed budget is $138,031.83 as revenue. This revenue would be available for operations and for the purpose of operation and maintenance of existing facilities. It would also be used to meet and pay expenses incurred and expenses that will be incurred as well as to meet delinquencies.

Attorney Nate Messenger addressed Judge Skar on behalf of the Owl Creek Irrigation District requesting approval of the 2017 Owl Creek Irrigation District’s proposed budget.

“The board came out with assessments necessary for emergencies within the last year,” Messenger said. “They found it necessary to assess in the manner they assessed. Also, note that it [the budget] is very similar to last year’s assessment. It is a bare-bones budget at this time. So, we would ask the court to approve and the budget be adopted.”

Judge Skar asked if there were any objections for the approval of the budget.

Mike Baker said there was no objection to the overall expenditures of the budget, but he and other residents did have some concerns.

“Our concern is how the charges are being assessed,” Baker said. “The upper two areas are being charged $4.58 per acre and the lower areas are being charged $21.81 per acre. There does seem to be a lack of recognition of the historic, 30-year history of how those charges were allocated.”

Baker said those in attendance at the hearing were all from the lower areas, with the charge of $21.81 per acre.

“We feel that there is a lack of understanding of how the district became a district with an agreement from those in the lower area allowing those in the upper area to use our water,” Baker said. “The agreement was that they were supposed to help us with our funding costs and the cost of our system.”

Historical recognition of territorial water rights and the loss of those territorial rights or the ability to draw from those territorial rights because they are allowed to use that water from the Creek is what is at stake, Baker said.

“We’re not objecting to anything,” Baker said. “It’s that we feel that $21.81 per acre in that area versus the $4.58 in the upper two areas is a lack of recognition of the water rights that we gave up voluntarily — that our predecessors gave up.”

Baker said no one in attendance on behalf of the lower areas of Owl Creek are objecting to the approval of the budget.

“This is just a heads up to the court,” Baker said. “We will work first with the district to resolve this and if that disagreement is not worked out, we will be back here next year with a serious objection.”

Judge Skar asked about the differences between the lower areas versus the upper areas.

Jim Collins explained that the lower areas have the pumping stations to get the water from the river.

“We have a total of six pumps and the maintenance is expensive and we expect to pay more, but not the value of 5 to 1,” Collins said. “I just think that we’re here to ask for recognition. We’ve brought this up at the last two annual meetings and we’re just not getting any traction at all with that board.”

Judge Skar said Baker and Collins were right in saying that this issue needs to be taken up with the boards.

Messenger agreed that this is an issue that should be taken up with the board, though, he said, he was not sure that’s where it should stay.

Judge Skar said it does not sound like anyone at the hearing was objecting on the approval of the budget, but that they do want to talk about it.

“With that, I’m going to go ahead and approve the budget as presented by the board at this point,” Skar said. “And if there’s any unresolved issues, we’ll take that up at the time of the approval of the next budget.”