Editorial: Who pays for water?

Tyson and the City of Storm Lake reached a 20-year agreement for water services which is much the same as the current agreement. Tyson agrees to purchase 40 million gallons a year. It also agrees to cover 43% of the cost of a new water tower near the pork plant but it notably will not at this time commit to sharing further infrastructure improvement costs.

The city reports that it needs at least $80 million for water system improvements. Tyson is by far the biggest consumer. The water agreement illustrates the uncertainty about local supplies and consumption. Where will the money come from? The city believes the federal government will come through. Industrial water consumers would like that. Meanwhile, residential customers will see steady increases at 7% annually. The city is committed at this point to 100% of water system improvements. We can’t swing that.

The same week the water agreement was announced, Tyson reported a huge loss in its pork segment. It is closing down another four chicken slaughter plants. It has not committed to sharing in Storm Lake’s water capital costs at least because it is not required to do so under the agreement. The rest of us are committed to all the costs in the absence of federal or state assistance, which have not been forthcoming. A grant effectively would buy down Tyson’s water costs if it pays for infrastructure that meatpacking demands, while the workers subsidize the rest through much higher rates. Also, we are drawing down our aquifers faster than they are replenishing to feed the corn/ethanol/livestock chain. As a result, residents of Storm Lake are paying and will pay more in order to preserve a system where the profits, like the water, flow someplace else.