Guest Opinion | When a Water Board stops listening, a community loses its voice

||| FROM ELISABETH BRITT |||

Water is a public trust, and on an island it is a lifeline. That is why the recent direction of the Eastsound Water Users Association should concern every member it serves.

In recent years, EWUA has shifted toward less transparency and more centralized control. Rates have risen, communication has narrowed, and decisions affecting public safety and affordability have been made with minimal explanation. This is not how a member-owned cooperative is meant to function.

A Policy That Treats Questions as a Problem
In December 2025, the Board adopted a “Good Neighbor Policy” that funnels all member questions through the Board President and discourages direct communication with individual directors. It even labels certain repeated questions as “disruptive.” In a cooperative, inquiry is not disruption — it is governance.

EWUA has also begun restricting public participation at its own meetings. Members who attempt to speak, raise concerns, or ask clarifying questions are told they are not permitted to address the Board. A cooperative that refuses to hear from its members is no longer practicing cooperative governance at all.

Costs Up, Information Down
Members have watched rates increase while the billing structure has become harder to decipher. EWUA does not publish historical rate schedules. The Association paid $5,030 in late fees after failing to submit a $10,000 waterrights lease payment to the Eastsound Sewer and Water District (ESWD) on time — a mistake members learned about only after the fact. Salaries and contract costs have climbed sharply, yet details about hours, responsibilities, and justification remain unclear.

To understand how member costs have changed, the following table summarizes EWUA’s published rate increases since 2019:

EWUA Rate Changes and Percentage Increases (2019 → 2023 → 2025)
All figures from EWUA’s published schedules.

These are significant financial decisions made with member money, yet members are given little insight into how or why they are made.

A Fee Structure That Punishes Members
EWUA’s “new owner rate” charges anyone who purchases a home — including longtime members who downsize or move within the service area — $28 per thousand gallons for a full year or more, four times the standard consumption rate. A cooperative should not penalize members for normal life transitions or burden new residents with disproportionate costs. This structure raises significant questions about fairness, intent, and compliance with the cooperative’s obligation to operate “at cost.”

Emergency Readiness Without Operators on the Island
EWUA is now transitioning to offisland operators, a shift that introduces significant risk for an island community. With ferry delays common, this is not a staffing plan — it is a gamble. In a contamination event, pressure loss, or system failure, minutes matter. A certified operator stuck in Anacortes cannot protect a family whose tap water has suddenly turned unsafe. Members have asked for clarity about emergency protocols and staffing. They have not received it.

Housing, Affordability, and the Cost of Uncertainty
Orcas Island is already in a severe housing crisis. Water governance directly affects whether homes remain affordable, whether new housing can be built, and whether essential workers can stay. When EWUA raises rates without clear justification, restricts communication, or creates uncertainty about operational readiness, it becomes another barrier in a community already stretched thin.

A Cooperative Drifting Away From Its Mandate
As a 501(c)(12) cooperative, EWUA is legally required to operate “at cost.” Transparency is not optional — it is foundational. Yet recent decisions point toward higher costs, less information, and fewer avenues for member engagement. The Good Neighbor Policy did not start this trend. It codified it.

A Path Forward
Some members support exploring collaboration or consolidation with ESWD. Others want EWUA to remain independent but far more transparent. What unites them is concern about the cumulative effect of decisions that make it harder to understand how the system is run and how their money is being used. A structured, open conversation about the future of the system is overdue.

The author is an EWUA member and former general manager of a Group A water system. She has also worked in state policy on water rights and public safety.