Our groundwater, and the bipartisan do-nothing duo Rose and Wentworth

Bottom line, 'we're

all getting shafted'

People get tied into knots over the money side of things, and end up ignoring how the stampede of cattle aren’t stopping or turning, and we’re actually oblivious how they’re running right over us


Send your comments and news tips to online.editor@valleyspringcomm.net
or to clayeewing@gmail.com

*Read the comments or add your own by clicking on the "comments" button below the story.

By Clay E. Ewing

Representative Patrick Rose’s recent efforts, along with Senator Jeff Wentworth, to provide funding for the Hays Trinity Groundwater Conservation District (GCD) without further taxation, is the preferred goal of all of us, but it would appear that a $2 surcharge on all water users might not be a bad way to go, but besides penalizing so many already penalized by Aqua’s rates, it doesn’t adequately address the long-term needs of water conservation in the region.

But, let’s ignore this for a moment, and concentrate on the more fundamental aspects of this equation. People get tied into knots over the money side of things, and end up ignoring how the stampede of cattle aren’t stopping or turning, and we’re actually oblivious how they’re running right over us.

One of the last drafts of the GCD legislation left to die, already included the 25,000 gallon stipulation; had removed the part about officials gaining access to your land without your prior permission; and would only affect wells drilled after this June. It would have gained partial funding from new well permitting fees, fees that would scarcely raise the price of the finished well, much less have affected your existing well.

As for the current annual budget: that’s an amount reflecting volunteer labor, with volunteer meaning the same here as what we do for charitable organizations: free and as the person is available. This would not be a business model for effective, long-term results. Perhaps how government officials are supposed to be—volunteer and part-time—but not necessarily the way to effectively monitor a vital natural resource.

These particular volunteers are professionals at what they do, and they can’t afford to work full-time for the GCD when their paying job is elsewhere. Yet, many of them do put in full-time hours because they know this is not a short-term issue, but a multiple-lifetime concern, and the ground work needs to be set and policies for the future put into place.

I wonder, instead, if this unfunded, unstaffed approach, might be an example of keeping a girl barefoot and pregnant: it gives them little time to reflect on the condition of their life, and whether that life is being used for high value, even though recompensed as though valueless. Are the various entities opposing full vestment of Chapter 36 trying to prevent another layer of government? That layer is there, but unable to fully function due to the lack of funding, so is that really what they want?

Even this funding source will end in two years, which means what will be an ongoing effort will suddenly de-fund after only two years—and, remember, the funding is for research only, not so much to hire and pay professionals to do the job part-time volunteers are doing now—and we’ll be sitting next to each other trying to figure out how to do this all over again.

Only in two years, the issue will be two more years of critical. What Mr. Rose says is true: this is not a time to saddle anyone with more taxes, but I’m mystified by exactly what that means if everyone pays $2 per month for two years, rather than only those directly affected pay both for use and for the right to drill.

Perhaps I’m just being cynical, but it would appear this effort gets elected officials through the next election cycle, rather than adequately addressing a long-term issue that will present some of the most fundamental concerns for our growing population.

I’m chaffing under the high property taxes already, so it’s doubtful I would support any more taxes. But, since that’s not what’s going on here, fees and taxes being two very different things—taxes we pay on a regular basis, while fees are one-time—then I guess I’m concerned that for reasons that have little to do with the long-term welfare of our area, Chapter 36 is not getting fully vested, but you, me, and future generations, are getting thoroughly shafted.

Clay Ewing is a former op-ed columnist for the Texan Express (Goliad ’84-’86), edited a regional bicycling newsletter in South Texas (1990-2000), on-going blogger and writer of short stories, landscape and color abstract photographer. Mr. Ewing is a practicing Realtor in the Wimberley area.