WATER NEWS FOR BLANCO COUNTY AND BEYOND #11Blanco-Pedernales Groundwater District approves 2007 budget
At its called meeting on September 7th, the BPGCD Board approved the 2007 budget, largely as submitted by the General Manager, Ron Fieseler. The District has been informed that it can expect tax revenues of $207,103. Revenue from other sources brings the projected total for fiscal year 2007 to $228,602.
Approximately $60,000 has been set aside in a "Contingency Fund". These funds are made up of money carried over from fiscal year 2006 and funds not earmarked for use in the operation of the district this year. This constitutes a set aside, above projected operating expenses, of 26%. Under questioning by citizens in attendance
about the size of this reserve fund Ron Zunker; District President remarked that money needed to be set aside for landscaping the district offices and for legal expenses. Approximately $12,000 is reserved for legal fees in the budget. The GM remarked that some Districts set aside as much as 100% of their budget in contingency. POW has been unable to find any District in this area which does so; the largest set aside found was 10% in the Hayes/Trinity GCD.
The budget also allocates $24,000 for salary and additional $3,000 for benefits to fund a new staff position. The addition of a secretary will bring the District staff to 3. When asked by the citizens why the position was needed the GM replied "to answer the phone when Paul and I are out of the office." On further questioning he added filing and data entry to the tasks to be assigned to this full time employee.
The sum of $6,000 was allocated for the purchase of Field Equipment/Supplies. The GM explained that included in that amount was the cost of additional well monitoring devices.
No funds were earmarked for increasing the number of monitor wells, scientific study of the aquifers or for public education or information programs.
Taxpayers may also be interested to learn that the "carry over" from the 2006 budget was possible in spite of expenditure in July of $16,000 for a second vehicle for the District. There was no public discussion of the need for that vehicle of which POW representatives are aware. The used vehicle purchased is a Jeep Liberty, a fairly
small SUV, rated at 19 MPG.
For further budget details contact either the BPGCD General Manager at 868-9196 or
POW at pow (at) moment.net.
Groundwater Management Plan
What is it and why is it important?
The Texas "Water Code", Chapter 36 of the state statutes, defines and regulates Groundwater Conservation Districts (GCD). That law, in section 1071, defines the Management Plan required of all GCD. The legislature placed such importance on the plan that it restricts a GCD from any but the most basic and temporary of actions
until a District develops and adopts such plans.
The law specifies numerous mandatory components of the plan, including such topics as drought management, control of water waste, conservation, aquifer recharge enhancement and the like. Of critical importance, however, is the required element, "addressing in a quantitative manner the desired future conditions of the groundwater resources." This is the provision that allows a District to manage water production and other means of assuring that the aquifer is managed to provide for current users, growth and the hard times of drought.
The law also states that, "A district management plan, or any amendments to a district management plan, shall be developed by the district using the district's best available data." On what kind of data should a District rely? Current use and demand, estimated capacity of the aquifers in the District's jurisdiction, recharge capacity, and performance under drought conditions are certainly key elements. Among the tools available to a District to develop these data are monitor wells, existing and new well registration, and hydrological studies.
According to one of the Hays/Trinity GCD Directors, their Management Plan is used as the foundation for their Operating Rules - as the legislature clearly intended. As an example, when asked about any challenges to his District's requirement that golf courses make regular reports of their water use, he responded that as long as the
Management Plan and the rules are aligned, they foresee and have experienced no legal challenges to the requirement. It is interesting to note that the BPGCD rejected the recommendation of establishing golf course reporting because of a fear of legal challenge.
An even more critical role for the Management Plan looms. Among the changes in the Water Code enacted by the 2005 legislature is section 1132. This section, according to attorneys expert in water law, appears to require that after the state's 2010 water planning cycle, in which local District management Plans are a key input, a District will re required to permit all available water not accounted for under the management plans "desired future state" or by currently permitted well owners. If this interpretation is accurate, a District that has not invested in developing the
best possible Management Plan with the most robust definition of "desired future state" is at great risk of seeing its water transported to other areas of the state by those wishing to profit from "water marketing". In other words, local citizens will lose the ability to control, effectively, groundwater use.
How does the BPGCD's Management Plan stack up and what are the plans for preparing for 2010? Although there are ever increasing demands on Blanco County groundwater, it has been two years since any improvements have been made to the Management Plan. A very small percent of existing wells are registered and therefore the demands they place on the aquifer are unknown and can't be factored into a "desired future state" model (protecting those existing users). There are only 8 monitor wells in the county, as compared to 20 in half of Hays County and 23 in Kerr County. There have been no in-house or independent hydrological studies of substance conducted in the past two years (river flow volume studies conducted by the District not being specifically groundwater studies). So the statutory standard of "best available data" leaves Blanco County rather bare.
In the current year budget, with the exception of a portion of the $6,000 set aside for well monitoring equipment, there is no allocation of funds for addressing any of the data shortcomings. POW has to ask, with a District able to afford two vehicles, a secretary and a $60,000 reserve fund, isn't it reasonable to expect some of our tax dollars be spent on developing the very best Management Plan possible? Do those in the county who rely on groundwater for life and livelihood deserve anything less?
Water News From Around the Region
Hill Country Alliance
The Barton Springs Edwards Aquifer has declared a "Critical Stage Drought" for the first time. 50,000 groundwater users in southern Travis and northern Hays will be affected.
See www.HillCountryAlliance.org or www.bseacd.org for details.
Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance - Legislative Hearings
An important item on GEAA's legislative agenda concerns our ability, as landowners, to protect our property. On October 25 and 26 the Interim Committee* (appointed by the Lt. Governor and the Speaker) to Study the Power of Eminent Domain will meet.
Though the agenda has not yet been posted, we are recruiting landowners to testify, specifically people who can believe that they approve of strict water quality regulations because clean creeks keep their land values high, or likewise are worried about or have experience with declining land values due to pollution.
If you are interested in testifying, or submitting written testimony, please contact Annalisa Peace at (210) 320-6294 / annalisa (at) aquiferguardians.org. GEAA is taking the lead on this issue, and all of us need to pitch in and let our elected officials know how their policies are affecting us.
PASS THE WORD
Do you know someone who should be receiving this newsletter but doesn't? Please, send this lpage to them.
