Drive Starts for Bottler Ballot Issue

02/20/07 By Jeff Alexander jalexander@muskegonchronicle.com

The bitterly divisive issue of water bottling in Michigan could end up on the state ballot next year.

Environmentalists and some Michigan lawmakers are working on a plan to put a proposed constitutional amendment before voters in November 2008. The plan was disclosed at a town hall meeting in Whitehall Monday on the issue of water diversion.

The proposed ballot initiative would tighten regulations on water withdrawals and require the state Legislature to rule on every water bottling project, said Cyndi Roper, Great Lakes policy director for Clean Water Action's Michigan office.

"We want the Legislature to have to vote on all water bottling projects," Roper said. "Right now, water bottling companies assume they can come into our state, bottle our water and sell it."

About 75 people attended the Monday meeting, which was organized by state Rep. Mary Valentine, D-Norton Shores.

The meeting was held as Nestle Waters North America is trying to increase its water bottling operation in West Michigan. Nestle, which bottled 226 million gallons of Michigan groundwater last year under the Ice Mountain label, is the world's largest water bottler.

Nestle operates a 740,000-square-foot water bottling facility in Stanwood and is considering building a second bottling plant near Evart.

The state recently endorsed the Nestle's plan to bottle 70 million gallons of spring water annually from wells near two trout streams -- Twin and Chippewa creeks -- that flow into the Muskegon River near Evart.

The company also wants to pump spring water from wells near the headwaters of the White River.

Nestle officials were not invited to participate in Monday's town hall meeting and the company's main spokespersons were not at the meeting. Valentine said she wanted the meeting to focus on the larger issue of water withdrawals and bottling, not solely on Nestle's controversial projects.

But comments from the audience made it clear that many people wanted to talk only about Nestle.

Former Whitehall Mayor Norm Ullman said he doesn't believe Nestle's claim that it can pump millions of gallons of spring water from underground aquifers that feed trout streams without harming those waterways.

Ullman and others at the meeting criticized Michigan's year-old water withdrawal law, claiming it contains loopholes that can easily be exploited by Nestle and other water bottlers.

Republican lawmakers, some environmental advocates and representatives of Nestle and the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality have praised the 2006 water withdrawal law. Supporters have said the law was a huge step forward in protecting the state's surface waters from excessive use. Critics claim the law is plagued by regulatory loopholes.

The law, for instance, prohibits companies from sending Michigan water out of the Great Lakes basin in freighters or pipes. But it allows water bottlers to send an unlimited amount of water out of the basin, provided it is packaged in containers smaller than 5.7 gallons.

The law also allows water bottlers to pump up to 250,000 gallons of groundwater daily without obtaining a state permit, provided the well is at least 1,300 feet from the nearest surface water.

In addition to a proposed constitutional amendment, Roper said several environmental groups hope to persuade state lawmakers to tighten regulations in the 2006 water withdrawal law.

Several people at the town hall meeting questioned whether lawmakers had the political will to reconsider the dicey issue of regulating water withdrawals.

"I have no hope that our Legislature is going to accomplish anything on this issue. I think a constitutional amendment is the only hope we have," said Ullman, who chairs the White Lake Public Advisory Council.

Ullman noted that one of Michigan's most progressive environmental laws, the 1976 bottle deposit law, was the result of a ballot initiative. State voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment adding a 10-cent deposit to pop and beer cans and bottles after the Legislature refused to approve the measure.

Supporters of the proposed constitutional amendment governing water sales would have to gather hundreds of thousands of petition signatures to put the measure on the November 2008 ballot.

Roper said a constitutional amendment would give Michigan greater control over its water and make it easier to stop future efforts to divert water to other states or nations.

"We're writing the beginning chapters of the water wars that are going to take place," Roper said. "For us in Michigan, the issue is, 'Who controls the water?' "