Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, October 11, 2011 (Agenda)
Item 22
>> item 22, consider and take appropriate action regarding termination of county water outlet in southeast Travis County.
I note there that the matter may be taken into executive session.
we will need to do that.
what if we lay out the current situation and we have several residents who have come down.
we'll give them an opportunity to give comments.
>> good morning, judge and Commissioners.
just a brief explanation.
excuse me.
Travis County water sales during the 1950s and some of these are not exact historical, best I could research them, Travis County began bulk water sales and deliveries to county residents, mostly farmers and ranchers.
the service evolved during the '80s to a potable water service delivery whereby the county was licensed and certified and followed all the statutory requirements by the state and e.p.a.
and actually had tanker trucks and delivered water through bulk sales to customers.
again, service changed during the mid 1990s to a nonpotable service and the county got out of the certified and registered and tested system where they provided water through bulk sales through delivery trucks and provided nonpotable water at the four satellite offices through a stand pipe outlet.
at some point in time these were considered potable water source, and I'm not sure exactly how that evolved, but it was potable water that was available through the stand pipes.
additionally when we got out of the business we actually auctioned off our equipment, our trucks and sold those to china town water works, which is still in operation today.
at some point during the '90s and early 2000s at satellite 3, which is hamilton pool, west service center and johnny morris was discontinued.
the most recent being johnny morris when we built the east service center, we moved out of johnny morris, that property was sold and we discontinued the service.
each one of these locations, these items were never brought to court, basically the service was discontinued when we left the facility or just stopped the service.
>> that's not quite true of precinct 1, though.
>> precinct 1, it was left in service until, oh, very shortly after we left that facility, and I don't recall us placing -- we may have, but I don't recall bringing it to court with --
>> but the court terminated service, notified all the customers, gave them about 90 days' notice, tried to find a supplier for them.
ended up with one.
sold the county's equipment to that vendor basically.
at one time, in addition to that outlet being there, we actually delivered water to homes -- to homes more than businesses.
we had a long list of them.
what I'm saying is Commissioners court formally acted to terminate that service.
>> correct.
>> but we made sure that at least the residents had another supplier.
and for those who were indigent, we had a transition period where the county picked up part of the cost.
>> that's why my history and facts, you know, don't recall.
recently the issue that we've got -- excuse me, the issue of theft of water where we have our lone stand pipe, the county auditor has numerous concerns with our processes, lack of receipts, lack of monitoring, and unfortunately we are in violation of numerous state and federal regulations.
nonmonitoring, metering of sales, also nontest of the water that we do provide which is a requirement.
the high potential liability and the county has looked at discontinuing this service and discussed this with the county attorney's office and they are in agreement with the distinction of this service.
we anticipated doing this at the end of the fiscal year 2011 and have recently extended it by a short period of time.
>> I'm not sure I caught that part.
>> we had talked about discontinuing the service at the end of the 2011 fiscal year, but we have now brought it to court and, you know, discussed, you know, possible extension of the service for a short period of time.
>> it's open right now.
>> it's open right now.
>> because the issue I had after I saw some of the reports, don did call me, what, a week before the notice or --
>> it's probably about a week before the notice.
>> week or ten days.
>> to end the service.
>> this is -- I guess my thought after thinking about it seriously was really how much advance notice should we give.
looks like all of the signs point to us getting out of this business.
but if you have been relying on it for years, then a sort of immediate termination probably imposes more hardship than we want.
however, I don't know that we ought to just wait a long, long time.
thinking back when we did it before, I think we gave about 90 days' notice.
>> it was somewhere around there, judge.
>> but we kind of made it clear, as of this date, as a water supplier, we terminated.
but there was enough opportunity I think for residents to make other arrangements and we were -- we were concerned about that.
>> and what we've done, judge, is we've given anybody that's contacted us a list of the six that we could find and their phone numbers to call to arrange for this bulk service.
so we're -- we're trying to research and give them other resources that are available, including the china town water works who has the previous county equipment.
so we're giving them the names of the company, the phone numbers and they've all been very -- you know, the companies have been very, you know, agreeable to talk to these new customers and set up service for them.
>> years ago, even -- this goes way back, I guess, at the corner of
>> [indiscernible] lane and springer road, the old -- well, in fact that's where the old precinct 1 Commissioner's office used to be, there was a water pump there that you drove your barrels on the back of your trucks and you got water at that particular location.
and, of course, persons came there from all over to take water as they needed.
and, of course, that's at the same location where we now see the precinct 1 j.p.
and constable office in that complex over there, but that was one of the first -- another distribution point that has been around for years and, of course, it discontinued after other things, other avenues were provided.
I think it's been a history of this for many years even dealing with the kennedy ridge situation.
the judge was here for that asb/ far as making sure that those folks, we got water out there eventually where they didn't have to depend on trucking water in and trucking weight out and stuff of that nature.
so it has been a migration over the years I think that we have looked at to try to make sure that water availability is at hand, but, of course, there is a process that we had to go through to get to that point.
so I just want to make sure that those things are not ignored as we even address this one over in the -- in this particular area.
so I want to make sure that that part of also the history that we got to look at.
>> and I remember, and this goes back -- talking about history, 1973 when I came to work for the county, I worked at the precinct office out there on 183.
I saw the trucks being loaded and they would be taken out to places of -- where people lived to fill their cisterns with water and it was for drinking water.
and I think some folks used it for crops and I guess, you know, livestock.
but -- and I knew that -- that, but we never sold the water.
and what I -- I guess what kind of concerns me here is that what I hear is people are coming up and loading up huge tank and then they go out and sell it.
and I certainly don't believe that people ought to be making money off of a county asset.
and then, of course,, you know, through the years then when I got here, we started talking about getting out of the water business.
my concern then was, and I'm glad that the face of not providing that water is here today because we want to hear from you, and I had a feeling that people would be really liking this service.
but, you know, the decision was made by the court to get out of that water business, and whether I agreed with that decision or not, you know, the majority rules.
in these decisions.
but -- and then we went to this list of people who -- who would provide water.
now, we have some concerns of testing the water to make sure that that is clean water for people to drink.
it is not to be sold to anyone else, and I think we've made sure that -- that people had small containers or had a cistern that they used for personal use would fill that up for drinking water.
now, if the county wants to stay in the business of providing water, we would have to go through a test -- a testing process.
we would have to be licensed.
and so, again, whatever the court decides, I'd be happy to go along with it.
>> court members, any other questions for staff?
if I could get you all to move over one chair.
several residents have indicated an interest in speaking today.
miss riojas, please come forward, miss parker, mr. Soto, mr. Davis.
we have four chairs.
as one finishes, I'll call up another one.
if you would give us your full name, we would be happy to get your comments.
>> good morning, judge.
my name is
>> [indiscernible] riojas.
I'm going to let miss archer speak since she has a meeting to go to quick.
>> good morning and thank you for hearing us and taking the time to actually -- there's much appreciation about halting and trying to think about extending it.
I want you to please halt -- continue to halt this until -- living in the e.t.j., you are totally reliant on the grapevine.
it's not like we're in the city and we get more information.
just like envision central Texas is happening right now, all the planning, we're not in the loop.
nobody is going from farm to farm, nobody is mailing out mailers to your neighborhood organization.
there is no neighborhood organization, thus there's no voice.
so there needs to be a betterrer way of sharing information.
I got the information just a few days before it was going to be turned off, when the sign was posted out at the place, and that's like -- I mean that's a really fast thing.
water is a basic need, food is a basic need.
this isn't like your net flix or your visa card -- not visa card even, but you can't make it without water or food.
please continue to halt the water until we can have an alternative solution or come up with a method to notify the people, like let's say give them six months.
there's the water project happening at the pilot knob where they are redoing the infrastructure there, they are putting in all the water pipes, they are going to good night ranch, they are going to your new tax bases, but they are not going to the people or to the spaces that aren't providing the new tax base.
so give the opportunity to run the lines down the main road and if people can hook up on to them some way, they will do that.
but there's not the opportunity to catch on to the water.
just like there is fire hydrants going down.
the water is around, people are looking at it, they are rattling the canteen but they can't open it.
so please, there's a lot of smart people in this room and we know a lot of other smart people.
the government claims, the federal government claims they want to give us money to do infrastructure, this or that.
there's got to be a way we can pull our heads together to get water to this area.
that is the same distance from this room as the arboretum.
thank you.
>> [applause]
>> thank you.
>> so this household use is the use to which you put it?
household uses?
>> excuse me?
>> how do you use this water?
>> I don't use it.
I'm here because I see the people with.
>> --
>> gallon buckets like throwing a tarp and rope over it.
I see the people that are -- now there's a man, nick, that told me about it.
he's 90 years old.
he's a cattle farmer.
nick vedoris.
he's used this, he has a pond, he's taken -- he's laid out the funds to dig those big retention ponds.
>> so you are here as a concerned citizen basically.
>> yes.
and I own property out there.
and wells are dry at some people's places where they don't have an alternative.
they don't have an option.
a lot of people -- oh, my goodness.
they don't have email, they don't have -- there's just a lot of -- these are your poorest constituents in the region.
>> okay.
>> and I just -- I'm just here because I feel like I have a bit more of a voice than some other people do.
thank you.
>> we appreciate you coming.
>> [applause]
>> thank you for your comments.
>> and miss archer, if you would come right here.
next speaker.
>> hi, my name is
>> [indiscernible] and I'm with miss parker.
we are here representing
>> [indiscernible] subdivision.
>> what's the name of the subdivision?
>> las domitos.
many of the citizens do not communicate in english and we need to make sure of the dire consequences your proposal to shut down the water supply will have on this community of Travis County taxpayers.
there are several aspects to this complex problem.
beyond concerns, there are legal concerns and moral concerns and humanistic concerns involved here.
by proposing to close the water spout on highway 183, you are proposing to cut the life line of this community literally.
this is a community just 10 minutes from the state capitol.
just 10 minutes from this very room.
I am pleading with you to consider this matter before making your vote.
budgets cuts to delete an on site employee is not compelling reason to take what little access to water the subdivision has.
closing the water spout at highway 183 will destroy the subdivision.
I invite to you think of many concerns and issues raised by the los colonias water disputes and precinct 1 not long ago.
we are in crisis since the water spot is the only option to obtain water at this time.
they have no water rights to dig a well or hire a company to haul in water and nobility-in water pipelines.
water lies directly Creedmoor water company.
>> many customers on the highway 183 water spout bought their land from developers who sold in 10-acre tract lots since the county did not require roads, utilities and planning for 10-acre lots.
the subdivision is a 15-lot subdivision of 10-acre tracts.
the majority being spanish speaking were told by developer and real estate company utilities would be provided but were not informed at point of sale of the water easements and pipelines.
you ask what do we use this water for?
to bathe with.
to cook with.
me personally, my husband and i, my family, we buy bottled water when we want to drink it, but we use to it bathe with.
we use it -- sometimes I do boil the water to drink it.
we use it to bathe in, to watch the clothes, the different things that you would use water except for drinking we use this water.
this is our only source of water at this time.
>> so the two of you reside in this community?
>> I reside.
she resides in this community.
she is helping us.
>> I'm a volunteer.
>> you are a volunteer.
>> yes.
>> okay.
and your name, mammogram?
>> belinda.
>> my name is jeanette parker.
I'm sorry, I didn't say who I am.
>> that's okay.
>> landowners are taxpayers that contribute from 60,000 to 75,000 in property taxes every year.
there are 25 families in the subdivision that will be affected by the closure of the water spout located by highway 183.
105 adults and children including children with disabilities and about 62 in animals and cattle.
if the packs pairs chose not to pay property taxes for two years, they would have enough to build the water easements and pipelines, a construction projects that will cost from 125,000 to $200,000.
before making any decision, the taxpayers are here pleading that you leave an open page in your book to brainstorm together a way to hire and to find a way in budget so there could be somebody there monitoring that water spout or look for technology as an option.
just don't make a complete decision now.
there was a rumor about having key cards that could be given to the people that buy water.
that could be directly -- they could deduct it from the bank account.
the
>> [indiscernible] is affecting -- affecting people from 183 that I know of from callaghan all the way to the 130 tollway.
but the difference I see with the subdivision, not just to make an exception, is that many other people do have wells.
l.
and ponds, but with this drought, they go to that water spout.
they don't even have the water rights to do a well.
what other option do they have.
if you decide to close this, they can't even hire a company.
they don't have the water rights.
that's something that I am pleading for you to consider before making a decision.
>> can I just make one point?
I don't -- this has not come forth as a budget issue.
it really is an issue of our inability or our failure to meet state standards regarding licensure, right, testing, and the things that you need to do to legally distribute water.
>> right.
>> exactly.
>> and so it's -- it's slightly different.
when I heard about it, it really was our failure to meet various state standards that we are required to meet by law.
and we have simply left the water available, more than anything else.
we don't staff it, it's just there.
and for those who want to go and use it, historically they have done that.
but it's been called to our attention that we are not operating that legally.
or safely.
and so it's a bit more urgent than us trying to save money.
money has never -- that issue has never been raised with me since this surfaced about two weeks ago.
>> the reason that we were being told the reasons they cut this water spout was because of the budget and the health hazards.
but mainly there was a lot of rumors told to this community, like miss archer said she it's a lot of hearsay.
there's no notifications being mailed to these people.
>> but we don't know who they are.
if you could just -- you could go there from any part of the -- of central Texas.
if you could find your way there, the water was there and you could access it.
and what we did was -- and it made sense to do what we did.
I question more lack of giving more notice, but we put a sign up there so that those who were using it would see it.
>> we saw it.
>> right.
and now if you asked me, sam, give knee the names and addresses of ten residents out there, I wouldn't be able to do it.
and I don't know that any court member or any staff can either based on what I have heard from them.
before we had an organized system where we had names and addresses because we delivered water to people, to customers.
and at a great discount.
so we subsidized that program a whole lot.
and looks like we cut the delivery part, but left the spout open so those who could find their way there could use it.
and although it's supposed to be the honest system for compensation, we have received very, very little money and I don't know that that has bothered us because this has not been on our radar.
but when they say here are the things you should be doing and you're not doing them, all of a sudden it is.
so that's the situation we find ourselves in.
>> it does sound like there's a bigger issue for y'all besides this water spout of a reliable water source to have your neighborhood, which we've come up against before in precinct 1, precinct 2, precinct 4.
it's a much bigger issue than just the water spout.
and frankly, it's the first I've heard of the issue, although it's unfortunately a very familiar issue to us.
>> and on top of that, let me ask this question for the residents that live within this particular subdivision.
how far are you from a reliable water supplier, a source of having permanent water brought to your residence, how far is that subdivision from such a supplier?
>> we live on 1625 and the water runs right through that.
>> it's Creedmoor?
>> uh-huh.
Creedmoor.
>> so as far as distance.
>> right in front of us and they won't --
>> it's right in front of you?
>> uh-huh.
>> how many of those residents are in front or -- the waterline that has the water you will need where you could have permanent water source?
>> it's the --
>> just the distance.
just --
>> the first six lots and then the back.
about 60, I would say.
>> how many feet?
>> how many feet we go to get the water?
>> no, no, no.
>> [multiple voices]
>> if you are looking at a permanent water source, something that you can have water coming in without the use of an example that particular water tap where everyone is going to get water, what is the distance from where you reside currently to a waterline that already exists where you may be able to tap into it?
so I just need to know what is the farthest distance from your particular homes that are impacted by what's -- what we're discussing here today?
can begin give me just a ballpark.
>> it's about 50, 60 yards.
>> could you come up, sir?
we need to get this on the record, please, sir.
>> it's about -- it's about 50, 60 yards to the closest lot coming in, and the lots run next to each other.
so you come across 60 yards and they can run their lines their self she they just need meters.
but they cross over this line coming in their drive.
the water is the break of the subdivision and most of the lots run along the front of the subdivision and the other lots are in the back.
but they cross water to get --
>> let me ask this question then.
who is the water provider?
>> Creedmoor.
>> Creedmoor is the -- is the provider.
>> and how much do they charge to put in a meter?
>> they won't let us.
>> they won't sell you one?
>> the problem is not the meters.
the problem is the regional developer did not do the proper water pipes and easements there.
>> there's no infrastructure and it costs to put it in, they won't front to cost and y'all don't have the money to do it.
>> correct.
>> it's.
>> [multiple voices]
>> it's kennedy ridge.
>> okay, okay, okay, everybody is talking.
any closing comments?
>> yes, I am.
I just want to tell you thank you for your time and I will let some of the other residents speak.
but please consider this.
don't make a final decision until -- right now we're asking for legislators to help us out.
I'm trying to get contact, media, I'm actually trying to set up a meeting with my Commissioner, hopefully I'll get to your office.
and we're trying to unite and actually do something about it for us.
but like I said, we are in a drought and it's not just us, it's residents from hall taken to spoke being affected and this is just one subdivision.
>> thank you very much.
miss parker, any closing comments?
>> I don't have any comments, I just have a lot of thoughts.
I don't have any comments.
>> any thoughts you would like to articulate right now?
>> right now, not really.
but I will kind of mention that -- no, not really.
>> okay.
are you miss soto?
we need those two chairs as there are others who would like to give comments.
>> I would like to ask you all to keep the water spout open or give us enough time that we can -- because we're uniting and we're trying to talk to the water company to give us a permanent solution, you know.
we know that this is temporary, but we need it, now he.
myself as a school teacher, I need the water to bathe.
you know, I can't go and teach my classes smelling.
>> certainly.
>> you know, and then my son with down syndrome needs it as well.
>> thank you very much.
mr. Davis.
okay.
and miss archer.
>> judge Biscoe and Commissioners.
thank you for putting this important item on the agenda.
for today.
I am jeffrey archer, a stakeholder in south Travis County since 1946.
I believe that's 65 years.
I am here to oppose the termination of county water outlet in Travis County, southeast Travis County.
this is a rural area that requires water outlets, but the bake needs of citizens -- basic needs of citizens in the area.
and my daughter, I'm very proud of her, she was the first speaker and she was able to tell you about the e.t.j.
and yack, yack, yack.
>> [laughter] okay.
the -- don't take this personally, Commissioner, but I have in my notes that the Commissioners have not seen fit to provide water lines and have not seen fit in this area for the residents, and we are 10 miles southeast of the capitol, the same distance as the domain in northwest Austin.
where there is water, water everywhere.
I appeal to the Commissioners court to reconsider termination of water because the majority of the citizens will be unable to afford trucked-in water.
perhaps we should look at other options for citizens of the area.
again, I want to thank you for putting this item on the agenda and let you know that I vehemently oppose the termination of the water outlet in southeast Travis County.
>> thank you.
>> thank you, miss archer.
who else is here on this item?
we will need those two chairs.
yes, ma'am.
>> hi --
>> and we need your chair.
>> I'm here to translate for her.
>>
>> [speaking in foreign language]
>> good morning.
my name is maria of a lar.
maria avilar.
I have three lots.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> I want to comment on the situation I find myself in and take into consideration not to close the water outlet.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> I have a son who is a cancer survivor.
he had a bone marrow transplant.
at the time I purchased these lots is when he started with his illness.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> when we bought those lots, we were never aware of the problems that we would have in the future.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> now they are suffering the consequences.
she has more than one year she cannot get her septic approved.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> she doesn't have water.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> I will have the necessary resources -- I don't have the necessary resources for a person to survive.
she has cattle.
but with the necessity that we have the water, we are considering selling.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> her husband and her have tried to unite the community to get together to address the issues that it's all in regards to the original developers that sold these lots.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> I know that you guys might not have the direct contact with
>> [indiscernible], but she would like help to point her in the right direction where they can find help.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> for her it's very difficult because she knows she has to keep fighting for her family, for her children and what they purchase.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> they cannot sell.
>> [speaking in spanish]
>> and this is the only place she has for living.
thank you.
>> thank you.
mr. Davis.
>> thank you.
my name is joe Davis and I live in precinct 4 and I have water about three feet from my lot because of a state law or something about property can be no greater than five acres.
I can't get a meter without subdividing my lot so I decided not to even go through that and I have a water collection system in my home and I have associated with some of the people who -- who use this water point in question.
and to do away with that point, that water point will have a very serious consequences for the people out there.
and there is a great number of the people who use that water point exclusively.
and if that water point wasn't there, they will be in the same boat as this lady that just spoke.
so I would like to urge you to seriously consider accommodating the residents out there as best as you are capable of within your authority because if -- if some relief is not given in some manner to the residents in that area, then it will -- it will be extremely difficult for them to remain in that area, and therefore they will have to find some other accommodations.
I would like to point out to the court that it is not practical to dig a well, you cannot get water in most of that area out there due to the soil.
the soil is black clay, which does not easily absorb water or transmit it to be captured from above ground.
and there is -- I talked to some gentlemen, they said that water point has been there since the great depression, and that has been visited on us right now with the addition of a drought.
so this -- this consequence has been extremely cruel to a lot of those people, well, all of those people out there that rely on that water point.
that water from that water point is -- is fit to drink.
it is not contaminated.
and I don't know why that's been given as a reason.
and there's several other suggestions that's been made because of closing that point.
I -- I personally believe that the point is scheduled to be closed because it's a cost saving step and in the long run it will not save any money by closing that point.
I realize that you don't owe us the water, but I would appreciate that you seriously consider giving us some relief within your power.
and I thank you very much for listening.
>> thank you.
>> thank you, mr. Davis.
>> thank you for your input.
>> > yes, sir.
>> I'm a resident and I use the water there in that area.
but I mean I'm a younger person.
I'm a younger person so I'll go get my water somewhere and bring to my house.
I have above storage tank just like most of the residents in the area because it costs so much to get a well dug.
it costs about $4,000 to $6,000 to get a well dug.
okay.
well, we got the -- we already got our own problems living in Travis County.
I'm building a house.
I take $3,700 a year to insure this house until I can get it built because it's basically an abandoned structure with no fire hydrants within thousands -- well, miles from my house.
you know, we suffer large costs everywhere.
you got a bunch of elderly people where you say, well, you can get water, okay, well I got some of my neighbors, they are living on 560, $661 a month.
social security the government is trying to take from them, which I heard you say you sold all your equipment to china town.
when you did, china town was delivering water for $40 a load.
okay, now it's 140.
you got $161 to live on, you can't pay $140 to get water hauled in there.
I mean that's just ridiculous.
and these guys here, I mean basically they paid just to slough us off.
when they killed precinct 2's water system, after they brung precinct 2 in, they killed precinct 1's water system after they killed kennedy ridge, thee problems didn't erupt.
they didn't bring us water and kill our water system, they want to kill the water system and just say y'all got to deal wit.
everybody else got their water prior to killing the system so it ain't going to be no big uproar.
>> let me make a comment on that, especially let me go back a little bit in time, and thank you for your comments.
I very well appreciate and I understand where you are.
and in the kennedy ridge situation, there was some significant things that happened for those folks to get permanent water source.
and you need to know what they are.
>> yes, sir, I'm aware of the kennedy ridge.
I know -- the residents that did live out there.
>> that was a process they went through called the step program.
it's called small -- small town environmental program.
it's a grant that was administered by the Texas department of housing and community affairs.
and what the persons did in kennedy ridge was to allow themselves to, number one, get a relationship with a permanent water supplier, which they did, and number 2, they put in sweat equity.
in other words, what they did.
those residents at kennedy ridge got and dug the trenches, laid the line, they did all that sweat equity to make sure the cost came down.
in fact, if you want water, you've got to put in the labor to get it.
that's how the folks got their water at kennedy ridge.
the name was changed then, but the relationship with that could experience -- they even had caps and all these other kind of things that were placed in the setting.
so those residents could tap right into a waterline for water and wastewater.
significant.
so the kennedy ridge, yes, it was a relief process, but it had to go through a lot of programming and a lot of other things to get it to where it had a permanent water source with the sweat equity and labor of those persons that resided in these particular subdivisions or a substitute proxy for that person.
in other words, if you weren't able to deal with it, you sent a relative to dig this the trenches and lay the pipelines.
so that's how that happened, and I want to make sure the how of that is laid on the table to provide permanent relief for subdivision to a water supplier.
I wanted to just lay that out.
>> and I understand all of that.
I understand all of that.
it goes back to what I said about side stepping.
they are paid to identity, you and the commission to defend it.
the same people that got rid of those pumps and things in kennedy ridge.
now that's their water supply.
if you think those guys won't dig trenches and -- to have water, I mean you are mistaken.
a reasonable person would even think like that.
>> can you tell me your last name?
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>> ...
we're done, we're done, we're done, we're done and all -- we're in a drought.
we're in a drought.
everybody's water tanks is -- they are dried up.
so, yeah, we have got to go get water to feed our cattle, pigs, this and that.
most people didn't have to sell them just because they can't afford to buy feed.
the few that can hold on, they need water you know what I mean?
you are killing water.
without another option.
they will say we have these six providers, there are six unregulated providers.
they go up every month.
you give them a whole new group of people to go after, they're going to go up again.
because when -- when the main people that they had for service was likendy ridge and all -- like kennedy ridge and all of those people, that water was reasonable.
okay, they lost most of their money on kennedy ridge.
they lost a whole customer base out through there.
okay.
well, now, you give them a whole bunch of more people to basically victimize.
because it's not regulated.
you know, so everything is -- there's nothing positive about this situation.
and -- and -- okay.
that's -- yeah.
okay.
and then it's like another area that used to have water issues was going out toward like del valle.
but when they decided to build that little mini prison out there, they took water all the way out through there.
everywhere that they dealt with -- where they took water, they had another option, you know what I mean?
now you want to take water from us and let us basically be prey to the -- to the water companies.
>> mr. Lofton, you were in los lomitas.
>> no, in between the gravel pit -- in between the gravel pit and the volcano in mckinney falls state park.
no development in that.
we're not even in the 10 year plan.
>> any closing comments?
>> no.
in closing I would like to say before you -- you know, before you kill water, you give -- give reasonable options that we as taxpayers can deal with.
like we're victims throughout anyway because we don't got water.
we don't got fire hydrants you know so we're paying because -- the costs daily, monthly, yearly, now we have to pay the ultimate costs of no water.
we might as well just pack up and move.
>> thank you very much.
>> thank you, mr. Lofton.
>> yes, ma'am?
>>
>> [ applause ]
>> my name is mary elizabeth Davis, I'm the daughter of mr. Davis.
you state that it's a liability in -- in handling water.
well, you're the county, that's one of the things that you do handle.
you do roads, you do --
>> actually, we don't.
that's our issue, statutorily we are not authorized to be a water provider.
>> but you are a water provider.
>> no.
>> at like most counties, you are negotiating with lcra, gbra, in order to obtain water for your future needs.
every county is doing that.
hays county is doing it.
the other thing is, is most counties are trying to encourage rainwater collection systems. So that -- that you don't dig wells.
your aquifers ought to be stressed out.
you don't want wells.
you want rain water collection systems. Well, my father, my parents installed that.
it's just that when it doesn't rain, that thing is not taking anything.
now, my father can go to this water source, fill up, bring it home, pump it into his rainwater collection system, during the drought times, and it costs him $12.
if he has to go to a private server, forget about the fact that dad has the truck, the container, the pump, and his labor is free.
it can cost him up to $400 if he goes to a private supplier.
that's a big bite.
I live in hays county.
I come and visit my dad's ranch every once in a while.
I live at eagle brock, which is a little tiny subdivision.
luckily when I bought my home, one of the first things that I noticed was who is supplying the water.
next door in the city of wood creek, you are people who are on aqua Texas.
okay?
you know how much money they are paying every month?
for water, even before they flush the toilet at the -- they are paying 100 to $200 a month.
I'm across the lake from them, I barely spend $30 a month.
>> who provides your water.
>> ?
>> wimberly water supply, which is a corporation, thank god.
>> it's not the county, correct?
>> no.
no.
no.
it's -- it's the city.
or it's the community.
the city is trying to -- it's best in order to get, you know, they want to get treatment facilities.
get everyone off septic systems. Which is another business of yours, on site septic systems, is that a liability?
>> we don't actually provide the septics, we permit it.
>> you are permitted to inspect them.
>> we are required to inspect them.
>> exactly.
that's a liability.
the sheriff's department is a liability.
the district clerk's office is a liability.
oh, and by the way, you have to follow state and federal guidelines.
you have to -- those people have to keep up with certain paper, they have to file paperwork in order, on time, they have to collect fees, I mean, you even have regulations, stipulating covering the -- the county jail commissary.
and the other thing, some of your -- some of2n your services to the public, not all of them pay for themselves.
feeding inmates.
that doesn't pay for itself.
you have the expo center.
most counties have civic centers.
they are always running in the red.
you do those.
I suggest that just because you've sat down other water systems in the past, you should not automatically mean that you close down another one because it's a habit.
if you -- if there are regulations that you have to follow that you are not able to follow right now, well, you can fix that.
>> please conclude.
>> you can fix that.
I would like you to have it stay open.
>> mr. Priest, briefly, thank you judge, Commissioners, morris priest speaking on my own behalf.
I had some questions, one of them was from what I have heard from the conversations from the court is this was brought to the county's attention.
now, whether it was brought by the -- by the county's attention through some agency, environmental Commissioner, would anybody be able to finds or was that confidential information where that initial complaint or bringing to your attention, that person is?
>> as far as how we became aware that there's -- of -- what specific thing are you looking for?
>> okay, like, you know, sometimes, you know, someone says, you know, the cops show up.
but the cops say we can't tell you.
if tceq brought it to the county's attention, would we know who brought it to tceq's attention?
>> not necessarily.
but I think the issue -- I don't believe that we've been cited by tceq.
I think we're concerned about the safety of the system.
and the lack of statutory authority that we have.
the -- I don't believe we've had any -- any citations.
what we're concerned -- I think that the judge hit the nail on the head, we didn't know the magnitude of the water availability issues until we put up a sign on that water spout saying that we were closing it down because it was -- we were concerned for -- about its safety.
I think that we are just now becoming aware, through this public hearing process, that the judge required, that --
>> requested.
>> I -- I wanted to just ask a question.
I don't know about the notices, you know.
we had the situation with the sludge when they didn't have it on the website and everything, notice issues on this since it was a health and safety issue and there were waivers or variances or something.
but the question that I had that I wanted to ask -- to ask was is there a possibility that you could take this under -- under 51 -- 55.1087 or whatever the economic -- I guess that's -- that's 087 economic negotiations?
development negotiations?
and if there would be a possibility to have a creative solution, not a public/private partnership, but not for profit arrangement with the people out there in that area that they could, you know, I was thinking back at the vogel fire department, didn't mr. Vogel have a situation where he was supposed to test the water from his water source or something.
I was wondering if there could be a possibility of a not for profit co-op type of thing set up by the people, where you could sign on and use it and I was just kind of suggesting that to the county.
>> I think we do have some models to look at, Commissioner Davis mentioned the step program, north ridge acres availed themselves of the water board grant as well as cdbg, but all of it requires us to kind of think outside of the box, look for alternative funding sources, and -- and have a -- have a -- a level of organization in the neighborhood which sounds like is occurring now.
>> yeah.
I was just thinking more along the lines of just on this particular -- on this particular eventually of course you know you would want to hook up to those water lines like Commissioner Davis --
>> [multiple voices] -- but I'm talking about in the interim if there was situations that I just thought that would be a good way to -- to just end gap, end game on this one particular situation where a co-op type not for profit --
>> I think that's one possibility.
but I think in the past we've also worked through tdhca to try to get something similar to kennedy ridge done.
we had one done at plover place.
but it doesn't we did have to look for a connection to city water.
and they're right.
those lines don't get extended out there unless -- unless some houses, a subdivision is going to go up and then it's close enough to the city so it can get annexed.
that's what really comes next.
so but in an area that is totally in the -- in the county, then we have to find other ways of dealing with it.
>> all right.
well, thanks.
and Margaret, I got confidence in you and the courts that y'all will do everything that you can.
>> thank you.
>> thank you, mr. Priest.
very quickly, mr. Reeferseed, very, very quickly.
>> I'm in the e.t.j., too.
and about the water situation, I know that it's not y'all's issue, but it's out of my control if somebody just changed the water company that they bought out the company that I've had for 20 years, they tripled the prices, now they put sodium fluoride.
so called, actually fluoriic acid which is a pesticide.
>> anything relevant to this?
>> we should try to lessen that there are -- here in Travis County, you know, that happened to me, I'm not asking to change that.
but there are other communities right across the lake, lago vista for example, they said no, no, on fluoride.
downtown have to have fluoride in your -- you don't have to have fluoride in your water, please give the people a choice.
>> thank you mr. Reeferseed.
now, there are two or three legal questions that we need to ask our lawyers, that will be this afternoon before we can get to those questions, we will only have three members of the court here next week.
two will be out.
we are looking at two weeks from today taking action is what I recommend.
so residents who are here, it will be two weeks before we take action and that water will continue to run at least for those two weeks.
any issues with that?
>> not at all.
>> and that will give us also two weeks to review the matter, get with legal counsel, try to figure out which ways to go.
kennedy ridge was a sort of concentrated community right there together.
our problem right now is that if you live anywhere in central Texas and you can find your way to this spout, you can get water.
you see what I'm saying?
so if -- now, we did hear from one area, but that's only part of the residents who came today, right?
>> uh-huh.
>> yes.
>> y'all have contacted the creedmore water people.
>> tomorrow.
>> the board meeting?
yeah, okay.
>> who is the director?
>> the director is
>> [indiscernible]
>> what's he saying?
>> I haven't spoken to him yet.
>> yeah.
>> because that's the closest out there, that would be the creedmore.
>> the only one.
>> thank you for coming down.
appreciate it.
hate to rush you, but we have two other items that we need to get to before 12:00 noon if possible.
it will be this afternoon before we get with legal in executive session.
we will have this back on in two weeks.
thank you all for coming down.
>> thank y'all.
Post Executive Session:
22, the matter involving the termination of county water outlet in southeast Travis County.
we did announce this morning that we would not take further action on this item until at least two weeks from today.
and that is the 25th of October.
and in my view at that time we ought to have a list of specific actions to act on.
between now and then we should touch base with the creedmore water supply company.
I forget the name of that concern.
Commissioner Gomez, should you contact them?
>> that would be fine.
>> creedmore mawa.
let's touch base with them and find out what the situation is there and try to help.
and we also will try to get staff to take a closer look at that outlet and see if there are any sort of security, safety concerns that we should try to address between now and then and be prepared to take specific actions next -- on the 25th.
and as our lawyers would say, any other appropriate actions related there to.
anything else on that?
>> no, sir.
>> okay.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
