Letters to the editor June 22

Pumped hydro

There is a consensus that there is a coming problem for electricity in the Flathead Valley.

One issue is the growing population in the valley. Another is climate change, which affects future precipitation and snowfall that are essential to fill Hungry Horse Reservoir.

 Recently Mark Johnson, the CEO and general manager of Flathead Electric Co-op, announced their plan (Rural Montana Magazine, June 2026). During  peak demand, Flathead Electric plans to get electricity from a facility using gas. This plan seems very sensible to meet the peak demand, but what if in the future peak demand becomes normal?

Solar and wind are considered as hard-to-use intermittent sources. Solar in the summer and wind in the winter complement each other and are abundant here. Flathead Electric has made an effort to use intermittent sources, but on a very small scale. To be used, solar and wind power must have a way to store generated power until it is needed. 

In Scandinavia, the technology that does this has been working for years. It is called pumped hydro. Inexpensive, intermittent electricity is used to pump water into a higher reservoir. The power is recovered when needed when the water is released into the dam’s turbines. The typical efficiency is 80%.   

Hungry Horse could be converted to such reservoir. It would be an investment that would a local way to secure Flathead Valley’s electricity in a changing climate.

­— Kirk Bryan Jr., Whitefish

Rate increases

On June 18, the Daily Inter Lake published a guest opinion by Mr. Jeff Larsen, who is also Flathead County Planning Board chair, praising the Montana Environmental Consultant Association’s review of the Flathead County Water and Sewer District’s proposed wastewater system upgrades. 

Mr. Larsen described the project as “fiscally responsible,” claiming it leverages grants and partnerships to “minimize the financial burden on local ratepayers.” 

The reality for residents tells a different story. 

On Sept. 1, 2025, the Lakeside County Water and Sewer District implemented a steep rate increase, averaging $30 monthly. Metered customers’ base rate jumped from $31 to $61 per VRU, while flat‑rate customers’ rates rose from $48 to $78. 

Another significant increase is already scheduled for September. These increases amount to a 61.7% rate hike in 2025, directly contradicting the claim that the project minimizes financial impacts on the community. 

Further, LCWSD President Marc Liechti stated last August that the cost of an additional storage pond had ballooned from an estimated $4 million to $11-12 million. Costs continue to rise because the project is divided among multiple contractors rather than managed by a single general contractor. This hardly reflects fiscal efficacy. 

It is also important to note that Somers County Water and Sewer District — though operating under its own fee structure — depends on LCWSD for sewer treatment. Somers customers must absorb whatever sewer rates Lakeside sets, despite having no control over LCWSD’s decisions or cost overruns. Ratepayers deserve full transparency.

Presenting this project as financially gentle on the community while omitting the substantial rate increases already imposed — and those still to come — misleads the public. Before we are asked to support additional expansion and infrastructure investments, they deserve a complete accounting of project costs, rate impacts, and long-term obligations. Transparency is not opposition; it is a prerequisite for informed public trust.

­— James Mathieu, Somers