Conley, His Campaign Rhetoric and Promises – Will He Follow Through?

And who'll be keeping tabs?

Will Conley and Steve Klepfer both responded to a citizen questionnaire before the election Nov. 4; here are the responses from Conley, who won a second term on the commissioners court. His responses have been edited for length. Still a bit long, but worth a read – if you're interested in keeping score.

Email your comments, fact-checking and news tips to online.editor@valleyspringcomm.net

(See one alert reader's
fact-check response at bottom)

Editor's Note: Not included in the questions below are two with significant and consequential outcomes. The RoundUp welcomes Mr. Conley to provide a direct and honest response to each.

First, will you pursue your plan – and push for a vote of the commissioners court – to have the county purchase the old Wimberley Baptist Church property and convert it to a city/county government center? It has been strongly suggested, through documented evidence, that this is an insider deal that will handsomely benefit several private investors locally.

Second, will you pursue your "alleged" stated interest to disband the Wimberley-managed Emergency Services District and merge it with a county wide, privately run system?

On the road (bond) again

Q: Many citizens have expressed support and opposition to the road bond proposal. Are you FOR or AGAINST the road bond proposal and why?

CONLEY: This comes down to safety, pure and simple. Our road system was designed for the 1950s and 60s, and in many cases it hasn’t been updated since then. However, Hays County is home to over 100,000 people now, not 10,000. We must be proactive in improving our road safety, or else we will pay the price.

I worked with state officials to make sure future road improvements in the Wimberley Valley, including Ranch Road 12, will be in a “parkway” style, which preserves our community’s natural beauty. Unlike what my opponent prefers to say, this is not a “superhighway.” I worked with TxDOT to actually change the state’s road plan to respect the integrity of our scenic landscape. The Wimberley city council agreed with my proposal and submitted this as one of their priority projects as well. My long term planning will forever protect this section of RR 12 from being ruined.

To take the burden off of the taxpayer, I negotiated for Hays County to receive $133 million in state funds if we pass this road bond and fix our outdated and increasingly unsafe road system. This is well over half the cost of the road improvements, and a great deal for Hays County. Now we can invest in our roads without a significant tax burden, improve public safety, and protect our scenic landscape at the same time. It’s a win-win-win situation.

Q: What benefits will Wimberley receive from the $207 million dollar bond? What are the specific plans with the road improvement running through the Square?

CONLEY: As for the square project, Wimberley submitted three projects they would like the county to fund. The county citizen committee chose two out of the three and I was able to get some additional safety work on Ranch Road 12 put in as well. Plus, we are receiving the money to make the important improvements on FM 2325.

In the Wimberley Valley the road bond has many important projects. First there are safety improvements on Ranch Road 12 at the Junction and Hugo Road. Sink Creek Bridge would be pulled out of the flood plain and safety improvements would be made where the new Wonder World Extension and Ranch Road 12 will meet. Second, we will finish the work my opponent couldn’t complete downtown and fix the bottleneck on the Wimberley Square. Third, we will have major safety improvements on FM 2325 from Carney Road to Fisher. These improvements will consist of turning lanes, shoulders, and deceleration lanes, which will keep our children safe when the new school is built and improve safety all along this section of FM 2325. These projects protect our families; improve the area for the Emily Ann Theater, our Veterans Memorial, Woodcreek, Woodcreek North, and many others in our area.

On development, now and in the future

Q: How do you feel about the development of dense subdivisions around the Wimberley area?

CONLEY: That kind of development has its place in urban areas and along the I-35 corridor, but not in the hill country. I led the court in rewriting subdivision regulations to make sure rural developments are low-impact, meaning larger lot sizes and a greater emphasis on environmental protection. I also raised developer fees to make developers contribute more toward conservation and infrastructure improvements. This is all within the county’s proper authority.

Q: What measures can be taken to make sure construction sites follow procedures for announcing new developments in advance for citizen’s review and input?

CONLEY: The new (county subdivision) rules and regulations call for a tremendous increase in notice to citizens. I have put more inspectors in the field to make sure builders are playing by the rules of the game and are protecting our resources. As for the True Ranch development, I believe my office performed well. First there is no True Ranch development. Second, when a developer comes to meet with the commissioner (which is part of the county rules) we discuss our area and the issues we have in our community.

When the development concept of the True Ranch came to my office I asked the developer to enter into a development agreement with the county (which they don’t have to do, in fact this was one of the first in county history) so we could work through these sensitive issues of water availability and quality, population density, light pollution, etc. He agreed and we began talking through the issues. Once we had something basic to discuss I called a public meeting so the community could have input and let anyone and everyone talk about the issues. The county hadn’t even received all the preliminary work on the project when I called this meeting and the project had never even come to Court for preliminary approval. So the idea that negotiations were done in the dark is just cheap politics. Hays County is one of the fastest growing counties in Texas and the I-35 Corridor is approximately 15 miles from the Wimberley Valley. We are all concerned about the impact from this growth.

Q: How do you envision the future growth of our Wimberley Valley over the next 5 years?

CONLEY: As county commissioner, I pushed for a revision of county development regulations so that future growth will complement the natural beauty of the Wimberley Valley. These new regulations will protect the integrity of our landscape, the historic character of our community, and the quality and sustainability of our water supply. I also created a new fund and began requiring developers to pay their fair share of costs to beautify the community and improve our infrastructure. Together, these new regulations and funds will enable growth in the Wimberley Valley to blend into the current community and protect our cherished quality of life.

Q: With more people comes more schools, more taxes, congested roadways, more crime, more emergency services, etc. What is your plan for protecting the Wimberley area so we do not become another small town casualty of urbanization?

CONLEY: First, I have to disagree with part of the question. More people does not have to mean congested roadways, more taxes, or higher crime. Being proactive is the key to protecting our Wimberley Valley way of life. Good long-term planning is only the beginning; we also need to keep our codes and regulations relevant to our current needs, and make sure they are being enforced.

On protecting our scarce water resources

Q: Experts tell us we are on borrowed time in respect to water resources. What is your plan for protecting the current Wimberley homeowners on separate wells from running out of water?

CONLEY: I worked with the Hays Trinity Aquifer Groundwater District to fund research efforts and better conserve our water. I support full chapter 36 rules and regulations for new development but do not think existing residential wells should be regulated. I also established the Jacob’s Well Land Trust to preserve Jacob’s Well, recover and restore environmentally sensitive land, and establish a new community center to further aquifer research and conservation.

As a business owner, my car wash has won environmental awards for its high-tech water recycling system, and in a matter of weeks my business in San Marcos will be the first commercial rainwater collection facility in the city. I would like to see this kind of innovation replicated in our area. Hays County currently does not tax rainwater collection systems and I developed a loan program through the county to help those who are interested have more opportunities to purchase rainwater collection systems. I have also formally asked the school district to not increase taxes on the appraised value for rainwater systems, which they are considering. These types of initiatives are critical to maintaining our water quality and sustainability. In addition, the conservation plan I developed calls for thousands of acres of our hill country to be preserved and gives us the ability to bring in millions of state and federal dollars to help us accomplish this goal.

Q: Would you be willing to mandate new development (residential and commercial) to “pay their way” for services that would encourage groundwater sustainability such as rainwater harvesting, clustering, native landscaping and designation of areas for recharge and impervious ground cover based on scope of the project?

CONLEY: Yes, and in many cases I already have. By my initiative, the county instituted a new incentive program to encourage developers to adopt “green” building plans, such as incorporating rainwater harvesting systems in new developments. I also established a requirement for developers to pay into a fund that will offset the cost of improving our environment. I have also gone on the record many times that counties need authority to apply impact fees to new large developments. The great news is that my initiatives are working, and I hope to expand them in the future.

Q: Would you be willing to give Trinity Groundwater more authority in regards to future development of our area?

CONLEY: As county commissioner, I forged new partnerships with the groundwater district by funding its research efforts and working collaboratively. I believe full chapter 36 authorities should be given to the Trinity on all new development. I don’t believe they should regulate existing residential wells. My opponent disagrees and believes the Trinity should have authority over new and existing residential wells. The Trinity already has authority to regulate commercial wells and this should remain in place.

These questions are from people who are serviced by AquaTexas

Q1: The customers are reaching a breaking point with basic service charges and high monthly water rates. Why hasn’t AquaTexas been forced to fix major system failures? What can you do to help these people?

Q2: AquaTexas’ Woodcreek North customers have been dealing with a hazardous, “temporary” daily pump out wastewater system for over two years. What would you do to make sure this problem gets resolved and infractions get enforced in a timely manner in the future?

My wife and I are now on the AquaTexas system in Mountain Crest. I am the only person in this race that has made improvements to water systems. First in Cedar Oak Mesa we have completely funded the restoration of their water system with state money. This has helped our environment and many of our citizens. Second, I played a major role in getting AquaTexas to make a $2 million investment in Woodcreek North which will help prevent water loss and provide better service to fellow citizens and the new school.

This is a start and we have a long way to go in improving AquaTexas water systems. Recently State Representative Rose, Council member Rassco, Council member Esklund, the fire chief and I have led an effort to restore our fire hydrant service. We are close to a solution and things will go back to normal in the near future. This was the wrong move for AquaTexas to make and we are making sure they change this behavior. I believe our community needs to put serious thought into buying this system. It will cost us, but it is in our best interest long term. This way we control our destiny not stock holders in Philadelphia. This Tuesday the county will hire a water and waste water consultant to start looking at these issues and we will be able to start making plans for the future.

Call me anytime on my cell phone at (512) 738-1079, email me at willconley@grandecom.net, or drop by my website at www.VoteWillConley.com.

Take care, and I’ll see you around town!

–––––––––––––––––––

Editor,

In typical political fashion, Commissioner Conley makes claims in this Roundup Q&A that range from exaggerations to being outright false. Here are just a few of them.

Conley claims the road bond "comes down to safety, pure and simple." Not according to official data. A few small projects on US 290, SH 21 and The Junction on RR 12 can be demonstrated to fall into safety projects, but over 80% of the bond funds will be spent on making existing safe roads less safe. At least this is what official DPS accident records and road engineering research tells us. Not a single person promoting the road bond ever provided any objective support of their claims that the road bond would make our major roads safer. Instead, they used photos of children and EMS slogans appealing to voter emotions. Such tactics got them voter approval but Conley's safety claim is simply not factual. I guess its better to feel safer than to actually be safer.

Conley claims that the TxDOT $133 million payback over twenty years is "well over half the cost of the road improvements". This shows how little Conley understands about interest rates and the impact of inflation, or is he just being disingenuous? Anyone paying their twenty or thirty year home mortgage knows that the interest paid is greater than the principle. And it doesn't take (an) Economist to know that a dollar spent today won't be worth much in twenty years.

Finally, any future TxDOT payback won't be seen by taxpayers. Future commissioners' court will simply spend it as our tax bonds are finally paid down. Conley writes that, "I led the court in rewriting subdivision regulations." The truth is that our consultants with sustained effort by stakeholder representatives . . . rewrote the subdivision regulations, not Conley or anyone else on the court. Conley can take credit for leading the special interests charge to roll back the consensus efforts of the stakeholders. In commissioners' court today, Nov. 18, Conley will have voted to diminish the carefully considered rules designed to protect adjoining property owners from post development increase in rate and volume of stormwater runoff. Maybe this is what Conley meant by his "rewriting" the subdivision regulations.

There are many other unfounded claims that Conley makes, but isn't that what elected officials do? I even question the photograph Conley represented as being him.

Here is a photo of the Conley I know at commissioners court.