Pages

Saturday, February 19, 2011

Wimberley Springs seeks 324 million gallon groundwater permit


The groundwater district's 5-member board will consider the application at its regularly scheduled monthly meeting on Monday, Feb. 21, 1 pm, at Dripping Springs City Hall, 511 Mercer Street

Note:
Below is information in the application filed by Winton Porterfield with the Hays Trinity Groundwater Conservation District (HTGCD) for a permit for Wimberley Springs Partners to become a Public Water Supplier (PWS). The public rarely gets a chance to review detailed communications between the District and permit applicants. The Q&A, between Mr. Porterfield and the District's GM, Rick Broun, is informative and very timely. Decide for yourself. Is groundwater best used for the build-out of a dense development at Wimberley Springs and irrigation of golf courses? Is anyone checking if the irrigated effluent contains harmful bacterial and chemical residue?

There's a good chance the permit will be approved. If it is, it will the first new large volume groundwater production permit allowed by the Board since last May's election when three new board members were seated.

Wimberley Springs Partners (WSP) states below that they have an agreement until 2037 with Aqua Texas to accept up to 600,000 gallons of effluent per day on the two golf courses. The golf courses are really just a matrix to accept sewage. (As golf courses, they reportedly are losing hundreds of thousands of dollars annually for WSP.)

In the answer to question 8, WSP states, "Our goal is to get 80% effluent irrigation, but the mechanical systems to irrigate effluent are more expensive than [for] groundwater, so we want the flexibility to sell or lease groundwater rights [to others] in order to fund improvements to the effluent distribution system."

Some believe WSP's plan is to get a permit in their name, but then lease rights to others (probably Aqua Texas, who is not popular at the moment with TCEQ) to pump much of the water they persuade HTGCD to permit them (WSP). It's questionable whether this practice is legal.

Send your comments, questions and news tips to roundup.editor@gmail.com, to HTGCD board president Jimmy Skipton at jimmyskipton@gmail.com or click on the "comments" button at the bottom of the story

Click on this link to download a copy of the meeting/public hearing agenda (Feb. 21 on the calendar) and directions to Dripping Springs City Hall.

Subject: Wimberley Springs Partners Permit

Board and Staff,

On Thursday, February 10, 2011 I met with Wimberley Springs Partners (WSP) / Winton Porterfield at the District office. We met for over three hours and I have been in communication via email and telephone concerning his application to the District. There were some follow-up action items that WSP has now provided the District, see attachments.

The following are the questions, answers and notes regarding his permit application. Included within the following are geological and science-based points.

1) Question: WSP has 6 wells listed in its application and 6 wells on your quarterly reporting. We'd like to know all 6 well names and how much they produce.

Answer: The only well producing is the Doolittle well, located within the City of Woodcreek. The other 5 wells are: Bull Frog, Maintenance 1, Maintenance 2, Park Well and Section 25 well.

Production History of Doolittle: 2006: 36,806,400 gallons or 112.95 AF (acre-feet) 2007: 30,326,400 gallons or 93.06 AF 2008: 38,620,800 gallons or 118.52 AF 2009: 24,962,400 gallons or 76.60 AF 2010: 15,038,900 gallons or 46.15 AF Total: 145,754,900 gallons or 447.3 AF Average over 5 Years: 89.46 AF

Note: WSP has owned these 6 wells since April 2001, all drilled prior to the formation of the HTGCD (District) / 1973,1976 & 1998, see maps. 5 wells were tested for pumping capacity in early 2001. The wells are capable of groundwater production from the Middle Trinity, Cow Creek formation. Test production ranged from 33-425 gpm. 4 wells were completed "open-hole". The Park well (908) was packed with gravel from 183 to 284 feet (T.D.). The Bull frog well (902) was classified as "abandoned". Those wells not in use have been capped. There has been some minor pumping from the other 5 wells, but only when WSP lowers a pump to check if wells are capable of production.

2) Question: Which wells does WSP use to produce for the current golf course and which wells will be used for the rebuild golf course.

Answer: Doolittle well will continue to be used for WSP's current use. For our rebuild golf course, WSP will use Section 25 well and Park Well.

Note: WSP wells are in close proximity to Aqua Texas wells, Wimberley WSC public supply wells and Jacob's Well. According to WSP, Aqua Texas acknowledges and approves of WSP's permit to produce in such close proximity even though WSP will be within Aqua Texas' CCN.

The District has evidence that pumping from Aqua Texas wells 21 and 23 (Aquifer Pump Test) impacts Jacob's Well by reducing flow. The District has no information on the impact of increased WSP pumping on the public water supply wells or on Jacob's Well. The District has a geophysical log from one well, Maintenance 2. WSP has also allowed the District to place a transducer in the Maintenance 2 well for monitoring purposes.

Normal faults from the Tom Creek Fault System cut the property from southwest to northeast. A geologic cross-section constructed from Aqua Texas 23 to the South Golf Course well (703) indicates a drop of 270 feet to the southeast between the two wells. The water levels between the two wells however, are within 5 feet. It appears that the fault is not sealing.

3) Question: Will unused wells be plugged?

Answer: Yes. Once the golf course has been planned and designed, unused wells will be plugged. In the mean time, they will be fenced to restrict access and covered.

Note: Wells not in use have been capped.

4) Question: Are there any other wells WSP plan to use and will you drill any new wells.

Answer: Depending on the golf course design, those wells included in our application. WSP doesn't plan to drill any but it's possible if we determine, along with the District, that it is desirable to drill a new well to better locate the pumping and lessen potential impacts.

Note: Domestic wells are not allowed in the subdivision. All new wells will require an Aquifer Test.

5) Question: Does the effluent that WSP uses come from Aqua Texas? If so, is it treated and might it cause concern to the neighbors?

Answer: Yes, the wastewater effluent is treated as per a permit that Aqua Texas has with the TCEQ. The disposal area included in that permit includes both golf courses.

Answer: Wastewater effluent has been used for golf course irrigation on both courses for more than 20 years. Deed restrictions for lots on both courses includes statements about the use of sprayed wastewater effluent, so home owners and potential buyers should be aware of this fact.

6) Question: Does WSP have a contract with a supplier for an amount of effluent each month? If so, how much and how might that change over time?

Answer: Yes, with Aqua Texas, up to 600,000 gallons per day. Currently Aqua produces about 200,000 gallons per day.

Answer: Aqua's contract runs until 2037

7) Question: WSP did file a Drought Contingency Plan (DCP) with the District some time ago, would you like to review the DCP or fill out a new one?

Answer: We can use the original for the purposes of the permit application. I am also willing to use the cutback percentages we had in the draft standstill agreement, as permit conditions.

8) Question: In 2010 WSC pumped 49 AF (15.9 million gallons), please explain the need for 250 AF (81.4 million gallons) per golf course.

Answer: The amount we pump is dependent upon rainfall and when we get that rainfall. Rainfall for 2010 was 40 inches, well above the 32 inch annual rainfall average for the region. Our average annual groundwater usage since 2002 for the one golf course has been 114 acre feet. Add a second golf course (with turf that will need to be established) and 250 is a conservative number for the maintenance of two golf course until more effluent is available. Our goal is to get 80% effluent irrigation but the mechanical systems to irrigate effluent are more expensive than groundwater so we want the flexibility to sell or lease groundwater rights in order to fund improvements to the effluent distribution system.

Note from the District GM: WSP permit application is requesting 997 AF (324.8 million gallons). There are two areas requiring groundwater: Woodcreek and Woodcreek North. This is not my recommendation, but rather the break-down of WSP's permit request. 125 AF/Yr. for Woodcreek, 125 AF/Yr. for Woodcreek North, and 250 AF/Yr. to re-establish golf course vegetation. Once the new golf course has been established, that 250 AF/Yr goes away. Depending on when WSP requires the additional 250 AF for re-establishing vegetation, the permit should be flexible. An example for a 3-Year permit: First Year: 250 AF Second Year: 500 AF Third Year: 250 AF

General Notes: As WSP is applying with the District as an Irrigation and as a Public Water Supplier (PWS), connection fees are in effect and will constitute a $300 per household connection fee as stated within District Rule 12.1 B. Neither the District permit nor the District Rules state the selling or leasing of groundwater, but perhaps Greg Ellis (HTGCD attorney) can confirm.

Quarterly Reporting, District Rules including compliance, Loss and fines, Water Conservation and Drought Contingency Plans, the entire permit shall be acknowledged by WSP and followed. WSP will follow all guidelines as stated by the TCEQ and their PWS policies. WSP and Aqua Texas acknowledge that WSP will be pumping within the CCN of Aqua Texas. Reviewing the District Rules, we can't force WSP to comply with an Aquifer Test ($20,000 -$30,000) as their wells are not new.

Administrative Check List for a pre-existing well permit: 1) Operating Permit Application: Completed 2) Proof of published notice: Completed 3) Proof of mailed notice: Completed 4) A Water Conservation Plan: Completed 5) A Drought Contingency Plan: Completed 6) A location Map: Completed 7) Evidence of annual production quantities, unaccounted for water and water levels in all production and monitoring wells over the past 5 years: Completed

44 comments:

Anonymous said...

You can send an email to various
divisions of Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to
ask them questions. We should inundate them with questions such
as: 1)is it legal for a Public
Water Supplier (PWS) to sell or
lease water rights to another
entity, when those water rights
have been permitted by a Groundwater Conservation District
to the PWS? 2) does spraying of
effluent have to be done with a
permit from TCEQ?

You can send your email to all three of these addresses:

Legal Services:
olsadmin@tceq.texas.gov

General Permitting Questions:
permitting@tceq.texas.gov

Water Rights Permitting:
wras@tceq.texas.gov

GooberTroll said...

Of course there is a good chance this will be successful. We have a new board with little experience with water issues and their board meeting is 14 mi. from Wimberley- in the middle of a weekday afternoon.

Winton Porterfield works for the Blacks in Midland, Texas. Winton Porterfield was the "real estate agent" in the sale of the Black property on 3237- which is now Jacobs Well Elementary School- to the Wimberley ISD. Must have been quite a real estate sales commission for Porterfield.

Winton Porterfield and Co. worked their butts off to get Will Conley elected this past election; Porterfield showed up at most of the Steve Klepfer campaign meetings with the intention to disrupt them.

So if you add up the Black money; a crooked commissioner; a phony "real estate agent" who replaced the Wimberley storage unit king Mike Holbrook (see the trashy part of RR12 just N. of town built in a FEMA floodplain); a disgraceful, dispicable water co. from Pennsylvania; a pro-development water board issuing permits despite water availability and adequate water disposal; and a board meeting in D.S. far from a disintersted Wimberley populace... well, I think the message is clear.

Perhaps one day you will have the pleasure of expweriencing what my family experiences every day- a below the state limit lack of water pressure. Served by an Aqua Texas well and water system.

In California a developer must submit a 20 year water sustainability plan to the county in which the community must be built. They have had water problems for decades.

No, this isn't California, but it's not Texas anymore, either. We're more like Chicago or New Jersey, if you catch my drift, and I think you do.

What gives? said...

How can HTGCD grant a pumping
permit to Wimberley Springs
Partners? WSP is not a water
supplier. All the wells, pumping
equipment, water lines, etc. belong
to Aqua Texas, don't they? And all
the billing and answering of phone
calls is done by Aqua. To grant
a pumping permit to WSP would be
insane. They have no experience as
a water supplier. Also, to keep
the line of responsibility unmuddled, the permit should be
granted to the company/entity
which will be responsible for any
mistakes, wrongdoing, etc.
No permit for Wimberley Springs
Partners!

Shell Game said...

Wimberley Springs Partners is
playing a shell game. They are
applying to HTGCD for a water
pumping permit, but they will not
use the water for the stated purpose (to water 2 golf courses). Instead they will sell water to Aqua Texas. Aqua Texas is hesitant to apply for increased water allotment for themselves
because they have a long record
of allowing almost 50% water
leakage, and they know HTGCD
will be forced to mention that.
So they get buddy WSP to apply to
be a water supplier and then sell the water rights to Aqua. Legal?
Probably not.

And your Aqua Texas water bills
will be higher than ever because
Aqua will have to pay some sort of
profit to WSP for the water. WSP
openly says it plans to fund an
effluent spray system by selling
water.

Meantime, instead of using HTGCD
groundwater for watering the golf
courses, WSP will use wastewater effluent to spray irrigate the courses. Up to 600,000 gallons of waste effluent per day, according to WSP itself. Breathe that!

Anonymous said...

All of the Wimberley Nay Sayers are putting out their Propaganda Letters against WSP’s permit but it’s going to be approved anyway. Why shouldn’t it? They did all the prep and are in full compliance with the law.

Jim McMeans’ C.A.R.D. and David Baker’s own WVWA have put out propaganda pieces full of lies about the Mr. Portefield, WSP and even Aqua Texas who is not a subject of the requested permit. The letters are meant to stuff the Hall as McMeans has admitted. Baker should recuse himself from the debate and voting on the permit since his long-standing conflict of interests is out front and center now, not to mention the County’s purchase of Jacob’s Well and his Nigerian scam thing. He should really resign from the board or be removed. This permit has nothing to do with the hole called Jacob’s Well or that ditch named Cypress Creek.

Wimberley has a reputation for being a nest of liberal hippies and no-growth types so I’m glad the hearing will be in Dripping Springs for the next 6 months or maybe forever. Maybe most of them will stay home and talk to the trees. Thankfully the rest of Hays County is pretty sane, sober and well educated. A lot of the ignorant and uninformed from Wimberley will make the trip to be sure although it will be a waste of time for them. We will have to listen to their rants for a while and then the board will vote to approve the permit, as they should.

Anonymous said...

As I said with my comment re: the DSWSC President article, it seems everyone having to do with water management in Hays County is corrupt one way or the other.

But now, I will also add the label "stupid", if HTGCD gives WSP a PWS permit.

What is wrong with all you water shortage deniers? Do you want people like Porterfield to control your bowel movements as well?

What Gives? said...

to Anonymous 5:33 PM:

It remains to be seen whether
WSP is "in full compliance with
the law." Is it lawful for WSP
to get a pumping permit supposedly
for itself and then turn around
and sell the water to Aqua Texas?

WSP isn't even truly a water
supplier. The wells, lines, and
everything else belong to Aqua.
Why doesn't Aqua just apply for
the water themselves instead of
making this end run around HTGCD?

Zounds! said...

Richard Sulivan has posted a draft
of an agreement (not yet final)
between Aqua Texas and HTGCD (see
www.atiexpose.blogspot.com). In
the draft is this provision:"Aqua
Texas will not request any additional water for their water
permits." Could this provision be
the reason WSP -- not Aqua Texas --
is applying for a permit from
HTGCD? Though Aqua agrees NOT to
ask for more water, WSP and Aqua
are conspiring together for WSP
to be granted a permit, but then
sell the water to Aqua. HGTCD is
then (knowingly, willingly,
complicitly) foiled.

The agreement also states that
"HTGCD will provide a five(5)year
water permit to Aqua Texas, Inc."
So maybe they agreed on a 3-year
permit?

Read Dorothy Knight's excellent
article about this in today's
(Feb. 19) Wimberley View, by the way.

Anonymous said...

To Wimberley Area Real Estate
Agents:

Although Mr. Porterfield states
in his email exchange with Mr. Broun that all residents of Woodcreek North are aware that
WSP can spray effluent on its
so-called golf course, that is
not true. I live in Woodcreek
North, and I didn't know it.
Further, there is nothing in my
deed restrictions saying that
such effluent spraying will occur.

You real estate agents had better
start having buyers sign something
which acknowledges they know about
the spraying -- a note on your
Seller's Disclosure Statement
maybe. Otherwise you may have
some unhappily surprised buyers
when they start sniffing those
600,000 gallons of effluent sprayed
each day!

Anonymous said...

Has anyone bothered to examine the so-called golf course at Woodcreek North? The course is in massive disrepair. It is overgrown with weeds and in no shape for anyone to play golf at. The fields do not show signs of having been watered other than from rain.

If the Woodcreek North golf fields is being considered a course, there are some serious problems. The fields are overgrown with weeds. The sidewalks are overgrown with tree branches to where a person has to walk around them rather than walk on the pathways. It may have been a golf course in a previous life, but it sure isn't one now.

Even the ponds show no signs of the area being watered. Of this is one of the courses they are considering, we are all in trouble.

Anonymous said...

All of this, both Pro and Con, seems to be based solely on conjecture and personal prejudices with very few facts. I have reviewed the complete unedited video that I shot of Mr. Porterfield’s presentation to the Board at the sparsely attended January 13th meeting of the HTGCD. I wish I could somehow share that 1+ hour video with everyone. I have also read all the supporting documents and the result of my study is that I fully support WSP’s requested permit.

While this forum is somewhat entertaining and allows you to vent anonymously, you should go to the meeting tomorrow with an open mind and open ears to hear the real story not the opinions of the haters. Cowardly snipes from the agenda driven individuals on this blog will solve nothing and are only used to reinforce their already flawed thinking.

Anonymous said...

If you are concerned about the
fact that HTGCD may issue a water pumping permit to Wimberley Springs Partners tomorrow, you need to be at the meeting of the HTGCD Board in Dripping Springs on Monday at 1 p.m.

As we have just seen on TV in
Egypt, the only thing that slows
the machinations of tyrants is
exposure. When journalists worldwide showed the fervor of the
Egyptian people for freedom, things
changed. We have to get exposure for our cause by showing up. TV
and print journalists will not give
us the coverage we need unless it
is worth their while to drive out
from Austin to film and interview us.

A second reason for you to show up
is that HTGCD and others like to
say that their meetings are very
sparsely attended, and so the
public must be satisfied with their
work. I remember, too, that when
Commissioner Conley held his dog-and-pony show for the HDR contractors to lay out his plan
for water and wastewater sources
for Hays County that few citizens
came to that meeting, and Conley
wrung his hands and lamented at
least three times that he was sorry
the turnout was so low.

Show them you ARE concerned. Come
to the HTGCD Board meeting on
Monday. They've planned it for a
holiday, but get off the couch and
stand on your hind legs.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous (12:04 pm) said... ”As we have just seen on TV in Egypt, the only thing that slows the machinations of tyrants is exposure. When journalists worldwide showed the fervor of the Egyptian people for freedom, things changed. We have to get exposure for our cause by showing up.”
That is the dumbest most ridiculous thing I have ever seen on this Blog! You are a complete idiot for comparing political decent in America to those Islamists rioting in the streets. for a Muslim Theocracy. If anything of that sort comes about tomorrow I will be ready for it. The liberal dummies that supported the rabble in the streets of Cairo, including Obama and CNN will live to eat their words when a Muslim Theocracy comes to power, just like Jimmy Carter did.

Anonymous said...

I live on the Woodcreek north golf course and there has been no effluent sprayed on the course for 5 years. The EPA stopped spraying when the homeowners complained of raw sewerage smell for over a week.
Also the Woodcreek north gols course has been opened then closed as an 18 hole and then reopened 10 years later as a 9 hole only to be closed again less than 2 years later.
TCEQ is the only entity that can grant a public utility permit. HRGC has been very open about only granting pumpint permits. WSP will still have to go before TCEQ to get approved as a water utility company. Is WSP going to do flow studies to determine if opening those wells is going to drop the level of the Aqua water storage tower at the north end of WSP property? Since a study costs $30,000 I bet they (or should I say He) will not do it.

Anonymous said...

@Anonymous 2/19/2011, 5:33 pm:
Sounds very much like a WSP shill and there are several in that pocket, in the Woodcreek North neighborhood. Can't imagine what will be gained by their support of this issue; they'll continue to have the same lack of water as the rest of us. Full compliance of the law doesn't make it right.

Anonymous said...

One can send all the emails you want to the TCEQ, one of the most corrupt, inefficient, top-heavy governmental agencies in the State and you will find no answer that would favor John Q. Public. Money continues to talk!!

Richard Sullivan said...

@Anonymous at 12:18 am yesterday,

That is the point, the Golf Course has gone to seed! It needs to be resurrected to regain its value for both the developer and the people of the area. It has weeds and dried up eroded greens due to the lack of the water it used to get. Most people don’t know that in its heyday the course was watered exclusively with groundwater at many times the amount that WSP is asking for now. It was built in the seventies and at one time a real asset to the area, its people and businesses.

Irrigation, (or “fertigation” as it is called) with 80% treated effluent is a win-win situation because, if that process had not been invented, where would that effluent go? Probably trucked out of the area to some far away disposal site. It would probably never have the opportunity to have its water trickle down, while being filtered all the way, to the aquifer. It is “ORGANIC” and will be a nearly perfect closed loop system that; that should please the conservation groups. This will eliminate the use of chemical fertilizers that would otherwise wash into the creeks and have a half-life of hundreds of years. WSP says that right now about 200,000 gallons of treated effluent is re-cycled every day back to the Woodcreek Golf Course from the wastewater treatment facility. Without this fertigation the expense of the disposal would be borne by the already stressed customers of the waster water company. The TWDB and laws of Texas define this as “beneficial use”, therefore legal.

When the Course is operational, there will be less erosion and resultant contamination of Cypress Creek from runoff. The course will be landscaped with our arid climate in mind; xeriscape and native plants. I firmly hope that the HTGCD will approve the WSP permit for the benefit of all of us.

Anonymous said...

re: "We have a new board with little experience with water issues and their board meeting is 14 mi. from Wimberley- in the middle of a weekday afternoon."

First the board is as experienced as it was when "your" candidates were running the show. The difference is that the majority of the current board members believe in individual property rights - something that CARD, WVWA, et al. members expect everyone else to give up for the benefit of the members of those groups alone.

Second, how many meetings have been in Wimberley? You've had your say for about 7 meetings in a row that were conducted in Wimberley. It's rather annoying to listen to David Baker whine, Dorothy Knight to pretend she's "serving" the community, the female Ed McMahon impersonator who plays sidekick to David Baker, and then Jim McMeans with his annoying "mining the acquifer" story that he presents over and over again.

The story isn't going to change whether the meeting is in Wimberley, Dripping Springs, or elsewhere. However it is long past time for meetings to be conducted somewhere besides the commune of Wimberley. The hippies are just disappointed they might have to drive a few miles. They don't mind imposing the burden on everyone else and they aren't interested in "equal time". Their real concern is that some of their circus cohorts might not be able to make the drive.

Anonymous said...

@Richard Sullivan: Not that one wouldn't have guessed it through previous postings,but now it's out in the open!! You have definitely gone over to the Dark Side and crawled into bed with WSP!!

Richard Sullivan said...

To the Cowardly Anonymous Sniper that accuses me of going over to the dark side and being in bed with WSP. You should identify yourself of you wish to make such personal attacks. I doubt that you will because you don’t want to expose yourself to the public. At least I stated my opinion and had the courage to own it. If you disagree with anything I posted, state your objections, not just throw darts from hiding like a coward.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Sullivan doth protest too much methinks.

Anonymous said...

Mr Sullivan has indeed gone over to the dark side. If you doubt it just ask some one who was at the meeting today. He is definitively on WSP payroll. He was recording the whole meeting on his little recorder I guess he doesn't trust any one else to do it right.

Anonymous said...

TCEQ is the agency charged with
issuing permits for effluent
irrigation. From their regulations:

"The general public or food crops can come in contact with Type 1 reuse water. For Type 2, the general public or food crops cannot come in contact with the
reuse water....Regulatory trends indicate that criteria for unrestricted reuse water will likely become more stringent over time....The maximum permitted effluent application is approximately 0.1 gallons per day per square foot."

In other words, you don't want your
children or pets playing on
surfaces sprayed with Type 2 effluent. And for one gallon of
effluent sprayed, 10 square feet of
ground per day must be available.

Present and Accounted For said...

Richard Sullivan is a logic-challenged water troll who contradicts himself so often as to be unintelligible.

Although in previous blog posts, it seemed as though Mr. Sullivan had a firm grasp of the corruption of Aqua Texas and WSP, I think his brain has been softened by some kind of adolescent need for the friendship of Skipton, Porterfield and their ilk.

I have no doubt that these men have been sweet to Mr. Addled Sullivan, but if he thinks he is anything more than a temporary tool who has lost all credibility with everyone outside of his own household, he is kidding no one but himself.

Richard, you are a joke. Stop bothering the adults.

Thinking long-term said...

Monday's disgraceful meeting of the HTGCD, although the vote went down just as we all knew it would, was demoralizing just the same. It is hard to watch as so many good people are ignored and marginalized.

That scores of well-spoken, educated citizens from Wimberley spent hours trying to convince the SlamDunkDeveloper majority on the Board to do the right thing and wait for the MAG before permitting away our groundwater made no difference in the outcome.

The deal was already in, as it always is with this group, and it is embarrassing and will eventually be stopped when the obvious ties, monetary and otherwise, between corporate interests and this Board majority are found out and prosecuted. I know money has changed hands, nobody prostitutes themselves to this extent for free.

Like all abuses of power and money, this will become more clear as the results come in and the players get sloppy in their greedy ways.

Wimberley is awake, Woodcreek is awake.

We may not have won the day today but these communities are no longer being fooled, they are fully aware of what is going on and who the actors are.

Anonymous said...

I sure hope we can get some of that footage that Fox News took at the meeting yesterday. I was sitting in the back and really want to see a closeup of Jimmy Skipton, red faced and blustery, telling the crowd of about 200 citizens why he's gonna give away their water without proper data. Despite their objections.(I thought he was going to explode!) And hopefully the camera caught that the only people there in support of WSP and Aqua Texas were paid employees and lawyers.
And hopefully we can get some national coverage on this because this is just the rumblings of what's to come.

Anonymous said...

If the "gentleman" signing in as Richard Sullivan is the same Richard Sullivan that "serves" on the WPOA BOD and it is THAT apparent that he serves another master, maybe it is time that he resigns from that entity. It bodes ill for that community having a Board member SO openly in the pocket of a developer.

Anonymous said...

@Anonymous 02/22/11 8:08AM said

"I sure hope we can get some of that footage that Fox News took at the meeting yesterday. I was sitting in the back and really want to see a closeup of Jimmy Skipton, red faced and blustery, telling the crowd of about 200 citizens why he's gonna give away their water without proper data. Despite their objections.(I thought he was going to explode!) "

The water does not belong to the crowd. Get it through your thick head. It's not yours. You have no entitlement to it. You have no entitlement to water existing in the first place. You have a right to access whatever might be there, period.


"And hopefully the camera caught that the only people there in support of WSP and Aqua Texas were paid employees and lawyers."

Contrary to your beliefs, there were numerous people present who were not paid employees or attorneys for these groups. This is not a "rule by majority" based upon the number of protesters you gather up. The protesters also do not represent all the other residents of the district or the other districts within the HTGCD.

Anonymous said...

I attended yesterday's HTGC meeting and was saddened to see the majority of the people present were roundly ignored by the board. Those of us who counseled caution & advocated for more recent data before the board made its decision were accused of being anti-growth. Nothing could be farther from the truth. We are pro-growth because we realize that without adequate, clean water there can be no growth.
The accusations of anti-growth were classic misdirections used by the legal profession and those persons who want to hide their actions from the public.
WSP and his hired/appointed board members who salted the crowd yesterday may have won the battle but they have not won the war.
I am sorry but I can not trust a man who feels that only his handpicked employees can be trusted to staff his "community association" and I am sure he "required" them to attend yesterday's meeting to show false support for his water show.
He needs to fire his "lawyer". Any person who would allow his lawyer to threaten a public board with lawsuits if he doesn't get his way is childish & immature and should not be trusted with our precious water rights.

Anonymous said...

@ anonymous 9:56am
If what you wrote is true then Mr Sullivan should resign from the WPOA board and sign up for the WSP board.

Anonymous said...

@Anonymous 2/22/11 9:56 AM said
"If the "gentleman" signing in as Richard Sullivan is the same Richard Sullivan that "serves" on the WPOA BOD and it is THAT apparent that he serves another master, maybe it is time that he resigns from that entity. It bodes ill for that community having a Board member SO openly in the pocket of a developer."

The groupthink mentality of HOA corporation board members rears its ugly head again. Moreover,this complaining WPOA board member foolishly believes that the WPOA corporation is "the community" when nothing could be further from the truth.

This Anonymous is undoubtedly one of the board members in the pocket of David Baker's WVWA. For those who may not be aware, the WPOA has been foreclosing on WPOA members' properties for allegedly not paying assessments. The WPOA then gifts the properties over to Baker's WVWA and decides that Baker's WVWA is excused from paying assessments (i.e., immune from the threat of foreclosure or any obligation for assessments). This is just a blatant taking of property from WPOA's own members for the benefit of the WVWA cult. Apparently this is this Anonymous' idea of "best for the community". Anyone that opposes this property theft scheme is marginalized by the entrenched WPOA board who would like nothing better than to continue business as usual without further scrutiny.

Anonymous said...

@Anonymous 02/22/11/ 9:58 AM said:

"I attended yesterday's HTGC meeting and was saddened to see the majority of the people present were roundly ignored by the board. Those of us who counseled caution & advocated for more recent data before the board made its decision were accused of being anti-growth. Nothing could be farther from the truth. We are pro-growth because we realize that without adequate, clean water there can be no growth."

The anti-growth crowd has tried time and time again to prevent a permit from being granted. They resort to protest and administrative delay tactics. This applicant has been trying for 5 years to obtain a permit. It's not the applicant's fault that the former boards were operating with such disregard for the property rights of the applicant. The Wimberley hippie club unfortunately believes that any action is justifiable as long as enough noise is present and that just isn't an adequate rationale for denial.

"The accusations of anti-growth were classic misdirections used by the legal profession and those persons who want to hide their actions from the public."

The accusations were accurate in view of the ongoing excuses that the protesters kept trying to generate. Examples: i) Demanding an aquifer test when the districts own rules state that none is required for an existing well; ii) demanding that the board "not make a decision" until the "MAG" was approved when the MAG is irrelevant as to whether the permit can be granted and the applicant has already been waiting for FIVE years; iii) claiming that the application was not administratively complete when the applicant followed the board's rules for completeness - rules that were established long before the 2010 elections; iv) etc., etc.


"WSP and his hired/appointed board members who salted the crowd yesterday may have won the battle but they have not won the war.
I am sorry but I can not trust a man who feels that only his handpicked employees can be trusted to staff his "community association" and I am sure he "required" them to attend yesterday's meeting to show false support for his water show."

Well this is the problem with HOAs in general, isn't it? How about eliminating these private governments and not subjecting people to "rule by corporation" in their own homes? For the 99% of residents that aren't board members of the HOA they don't want you OR the developer to have such control over their lives and property.

"He needs to fire his "lawyer". Any person who would allow his lawyer to threaten a public board with lawsuits if he doesn't get his way is childish & immature and should not be trusted with our precious water rights."

You must have some imaginary "precious water rights". The right that you have, however, is the very right that you wanted to deny another property owner - the right to access the groundwater. Neither one of you have a right or entitlement for it to be there. As for the attorney, 5 years of working with the HTGCD is enough. The dog and pony show by the developer wasn't really for the benefit of the board - it was to inform yokels like yourself that further interference with the developer's property rights were going to result in litigation. This applicant had vested rights in place long before this district ever came into being. The attorney also pointed out that his client was willing to accept a permit at 1/4 the amount they believed they were entitled to as a compromise for the permit. The HTGCD board's attorney was present and he spoke and there is no reason why the applicant's attorney shouldn't also be present to represent his client.

Treehugger said...

I didn't see any hippies at yesterday's meeting, but I am sure some of you know what one looks like better than me.

Are you rednecks still mad that the cool kids won't invite you to play with them?

I thought you would be over that by now.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @10:07a.m is Richard Sullivan and yes he should be removed from the WPOA Board. His constant diatribe against an association board he serves on, and his nasty comments about WVWA, Jim McMeans and David Baker are unethical to say the least.

Anonymous said...

It appears that the Anti-Growth Water Hippies of Wimberley aren’t very gracious losers. They lost because their tired rhetoric and constant excuses just wore out. When Comrade Baker would come up with what he thought was a reason to not grant the permits, he would be shot down only to bring up another lame excuse. After all the weak excuses were proven wrong, he and his WVWA Kool-Aid drinkers lost, big time! They need to get used to it since it is good for 3 years.

This was never about a permit since WSP has been pumping and could continue to pump all the water they need with impunity. The permit now gives the HTGCD right to oversee their operations.

It is a fact that Dripping Springs Water Supply Company has never had a permit and continues to pump and sell thousands of acre-feet of Trinity Aquifer water every day. It is funny that the water hippies of Wimberley never complain about that. You see, they don’t care about growth in the northern part of the District, just their “Little Piece Of Heaven”.

The truth is that the small crowd of “Anti-Growth”, followers will stop at nothing to prevent newcomers from exercising the same property and water rights that they have. Yes, the activists at the hearing formed a majority of the attendees but thankfully they are a minority in their communities. Nearly all of the protestors were from the Wimberley area.

The “real people” don’t want to get involved in these contentious hearings because they have better things to do such as work or be with their families. They rarely Blog since they see what a vicious bunch the anti-everything groups are. They have thin skins and thick heads. Notice how they viciously attack other bloggers for voicing their opinions.

Anonymous said...

Now, Bubba... Don't be a hippocrite!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @12:11p.m.: You win the prize for the 'most vicious comment'.

Anonymous said...

In an area tourist pamphlet, I
found a listing of "Area Golf
Courses," and there was a Southwest
Greens listed on 43 Doolittle Drive
in City of Woodcreek. 847-1777

Does anyone know about that place?
Is it owned by Wimberley Springs
Partners? Does it use effluent
irrigation?

Anonymous said...

Way to go Jimbo! HOw much did that vote cost? A 6 of bud lite and a bag of cheetos?

Anonymous said...

@ anonymous 2/22 7:44pm
Southwest Greens is not a golf course it is a company that sells and installs artificial putting greens. They are wrongly listed as a golf course.
Say if WSP installed artificial greens, tee boxes & fairways then our problems would be solved. hint-hint!!

Anonymous said...

@ anonymous 2/22 10:07am
I have been to several WPOA meetings and never saw them or heard of them taking someone's home. I have lived here for over 10 years and never heard of them taking a home during that time. Where did you get your information? As far as the lots deeded to the WVWA they were gifted to the WPOA and were in a flood plane so they could never be built on. This I know from personal experience. Get your facts straight before you slander someone. If you can't prove your "facts" then keep your mouth shut.

Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous at February 25, 2011 12:36 AM

You accused the anonymous 2/22 10:07am of misstating the facts, when he/she never even said the word “home” in his/her post, the word used was "property". Why don’t you get your facts straight before YOU make such statements?

If the lots, as you say “were in a flood plane so they could never be built on”, what was the point of “donating” them? They were of some value to the County taxpayers since they had appraised value. Donating these lots to the 501 (c) (3), WVWA actually cheated the County out of present and future tax revenues by taking them off of the tax rolls. I would assume, eliminating the maintenance fees for these WVWA owned lots, was because the lots could not be built on. If that is the case, how about doing the same for the hundreds of other flood plane lots and their owners in your subdivision? If I had previously owned one of those lots, that were probably obtained through foreclosure, I’d be a bit upset at the ‘taking’ of my property. If I presently owned a similar flood pane lot, I’d be at the next Association meeting demanding fair and equal treatment as set by precedent.

Since you seem to know so much about the transaction, what was the quid pro quo for these donations? Care to share?

Anonymous said...

@ anon 9:14 am
I don't know about others but I am not aware of any"quid pro quo" in fact donating these lots actually deprived the WPOA of any fees that they might get from these lots. I do not know what your agenda is but you obviously have a grudge against the WPOA. What's the matter did you not pay you maintenance fees and they took you to court for being a deadbeat. I have paid my fees for over 30 years and have never had a problem with the WPOA board.
Buy the way where did you get the idea that there are hundreds of floodplain lots in the WPOA. If you look at the plot plans you will see that there are very few flood plane lots and WSP owns the majority of them. I don't see them donating them to assure water conservation. Also the county does not need the taxes from less than 10 lots to keep in business. If they do we are in bigger trouble than I realized. You are just a rabelrouser who is trying to deflect the intelligent people who read this blog from focusing on the real problem. We need to protect our water. If we squander our precious water then we can all just pack up and leave because no one will be able to live here.
Buy the way if you hate the WPOA so much why did you move here. You need to move away and leave us to our so called ignorance since you seem to think we are so stupid that we would let people take our property without a legal fight. Oh that's right you did not mention that every piece of "property" they supposedly took was done through the legal process and every property owner was accorded due process of law.But then you are probably not familiar with due process or are you more familiar than you want anyone to know.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 12:49a.m.: You are exactly right. Why should people who faithfully pay their fair share be subjected to the deadbeats taking a free ride?

Allow me to present this analogy:

Everyone who buys groceries or goods at the store is paying extra each and every time they checkout. Honest people are forced to pay extra for the losses the stores suffer due to shoplifters.

We have a shared responsibility to do what is best for our community. It really is that simply.