EID Trustee Chairman Michael Scott Hughes: Emigration Improvement District Had No Obligation to Report Lead Contamination To Water Users and “Standby Customers” in 2016
Feds are Investigating Whether Utah Lied to Obtain Grants, Say the State’s Attorney General is Stonewalling
The entire premise of the HCN article “Paranoia and a ‘preposterously’ oversized water tank” is both false and misleading.
“Fire Paranoia” is not the problem in Emigration Canyon, Utah.
Development. In 1998, private land-developers of the “EID Advisory Committee” sold numerous parcels designated as the “Bel Air of Salt Lake City” to unsuspecting buyers. However, because Canyon residents had defeated EID’s proposal to construct a water system in 1995, they had neither the water rights nor infrastructure to make the project economically viable. So, ignoring Canyon voters, EID simply acquired $6.3 million dollars of debt through a program intended for “economically disadvantaged communities” thereby yielding tens of millions in private profit.
What else did the article fail to mention?
According to its own records, EID water-supply lines are grossly undersized and cannot provide adequate flow in case of a fire emergency. This was the additional reason why Utah State Engineer Dr. Steve Onysko refused to certify the project in addition to a “preposterously oversized” water tank and improper use of federally-backed funds.
Most importantly, EID’s own commissioned study concluded that their own large-diameter commercial wells have been groundwater mining since 1998. Rather than “fanning rumors”, we have meticulously collected evidence of impairment of over 40 private wells.
What is next?
Contrary to the article’s “bottomless pit” metaphor, if pending litigation against EID is successful, The ECHO-Association will relieve taxpayers of federally-backed debt with the stroke of a pen.
Why is that now likely to occur?
Notably, the 6-year statute of limitation cited by both Judge Parish and HCN was recently overruled unanimously by the US Supreme Court (Docket No. 18-315) in favor of the 10-year statute argued by our legal team since Day 1.