Note: Earlier this week, the RoundUp received an interesting email following our post on the City of Wimberley's and GBRA's failed attempt to secure an $8.5 million loan from the Texas Water Development Board to pay for a proposed central sewer system. Scroll down to the story: "Water Board refuses Wimberley wastewater loan; it's back to the drawing board." The story generated a lot of comments from readers. The e-mailer is an insider familiar with TWDB loan programs and decentralized systems, who said in a phone call, he would prefer to remain anonymous. City Administrator Don Ferguson said this morning the city is "continuing to work through the process" on its current loan application. The council has yet to meet on the matter. So, here's another possibility the city might take a look at from the agency's Federal and State Office and find that it might offer less onerous financing hurdles.
Send your comments and news tips to roundup.editor@gmail.com or click on the "comments" button at the bottom of the story
"Very good article on the Wimberley presentation at the Board meeting...and accurate. I did not want to jump in to the comment section, sounds like a war is going on, but I wanted to comment on the system being proposed.
The TWDB recognized that the plan did not have a real adequate alternative analysis that considered other options that likely would be more affordable. The Engineer of the project is normally very good . . . but they may have been acting on direction from their client. Often we see that our clients focus on what they envision early in the process and do not consider alternatives.
What appears to be a good alternative for Wimberley is a decentralized system. What the appearance of the system would be, I do not know because they depend on local factors and geography. However I can show several case studies where decentralized systems have been installed and are operating very well at costs much less than alternative centralized systems.
If Wimberley were able to propose a decentralized system and present it to the TWDB for funding for the Fiscal Year 2011 projects, it would qualify as a "green" project and probably be ranked high in (the) list of projects. A proposal with preliminary engineering and cost estimates would need to be completed by January. The decentralized system would still probably cost $10,000 - 20,000 per connection, can that be accepted by the community?"
7 comments:
It figures, just add the word “Green” to the project and everybody is supposed to stand up an salute. The loan application was denied or sent back because the TWDB could not be assured Wimberley could or would pay the loan back, not because it was not “Green” enough. To go with an unproven project adds even more risk that the loan won’t get paid back and might even require more money in the long run.
Damn it Wimberley, get a property tax going and do it right. You know you are going to need one sooner or later so grow up and become the City you wanted to be.
This whole anonymous insider of the process seems awfully suspicious, his statements seem like another end-around by that pesky Davis V.
C'mon Ricky. Try to keep an open mind.
Just because the word "green" has often meant nothing more than a marketing word for businesses to raise prices and make consumers feel environmentally righteous, sometimes there is very positive merit to a "green" concept.
In the case of the Wimberley downtown waste water solution, why not check out the "green" decentralized system as written about in this article? If, in fact, it would only cost even 25% more than the stated projections, it would be much better than forcing another local tax on citizens, at least at this time.
And even if this "green" solution were only temporary until the local real estate market and general economy picks up and we start seeing more general tax revenue, then we can again look at another more expensive, long term waste water solution.
Your "green" cynicism is valid, but everything has some merit, even if only for investigation and contemplation.
"The decentralized system would still probably cost $10,000 - 20,000 per connection, can that be accepted by the community?"
Screw that. Let the downtown businesses pay for the connection costs themselves. If a viable individual business cannot afford 10K-20K to pay out of their own pocket, they shouldn't be running a business.
My taxes are not going to subsidize some unecessary junktique or yard art store, some lonely spouse's bad art store, or some millionaire's curio shop. That's just more private special interest tax pilfering bullsh*t.
Let's try this again here. I tried to post these links in response to requests for information in comments on the TWDB story, but it didn't get posted. So, here are two links with information on the types of methods and strategies I have suggested might be considered for Wimberley:
http://www.orenco.com/doclib/documents/ABR-SMALLCOMM-1_PRN.pdf
www.werf.org/distributedwater
Additionally, I've received this in response to a request on EPA's decentralized listserve (yes, there IS a whole community of thought on this matter, it is not just my R&D project, as some commentors have suggested):
I have 7 utilities who use our Effluent Sewer and AdvanTex Treatment Systems equipment and will off to host a tour or site visit. Dr. Kevin D. White who heads up the University of South Alabama Department of Civil Engineering has been very helpful talking to groups who have come to Mobile to “see” it work. If they won’t come and see, we can talk and help them “see” other utilities and small towns are benefitting from an approach that is half the cost of conventional collection and treatment does work. Refer them to www.orenco.com where they have example after example in numerous case studies with pictures! The most valuable sales tool I have is my van where I have looked back in the rear view mirror and seen people change when I drive them out to see one of the 20 treatment systems that are working and can now show them more than 50 subdivisions, 6 and soon to be 7 Mobile County Public Schools, 2 Truck Stops, 2 Waffle Houses, a McDonalds, an Arby’s, a Stuckeys, a 150 worker plant, row businesses, and a Senior Citizen’s 72 Apartment Complex all on Effluent Sewer and Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Systems. Seeing is sometimes believing. Our best utility customer, South Alabama Utilities, travelled all the way to Oregon to see systems operated by Orenco before they made the decision. They now have 13 WWTFs and 47 Subdivisions.
Hope this may help!
Billy
William H. McLean
DAUPHIN ENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT, LLC
This sounds crazy but...
Why doesn’t the City shut down all the crap shacks in the target area as law enforcement for polluting the creek and river. Then offer to buy them out for cheap or exercise eminent domain. After the dust settles, level the whole mess from the bridge to the Burger Barn. Build a huge entertainment plaza for concerts, open air theater, Mega Garage Sales and fund raising events. Half of the area would be used for parking and a refreshment center, large restrooms with a decentralized wastewater system that seems to be gaining popularity. There would have to be restrictions so ti didn't turn into another Ghetto for junk dealers.
Wimberley could become an entertainment Mecca much greater than Austin.
Be easy on me guys, I know, I’m a dreamer.
I watched the Texas Water Development Board finance committee tape and saw that GBRA has already fronted $500,000 in engineering costs for the WW system. Are the engineers for the decentralized system willing to work at risk too? How will we pay GBRA back?There is also the pesky issue of who will back the loan. Perhaps the anonymous TWDB employee can recommend a plan. TCEQ doesn't seem to care about the septic in the creek maybe the EPA will. Maybe we need to start a petition for the City Administrator to get the septic out of the creek instead of letting it get "fuller every day" or do something about the "crisis" he talked about in the meeting. Is the sales tax from all the junk from China that they sell to tourists on the square worth ruining our water quality over? I say not. I don't think people come here to buy junk I think they come here for the water quality. Protest at Thursday's Council Meeting! Sign up to speak and be heard.
Closet Conservative said...
“My taxes are not going to subsidize some unnecessary junktique or yard art store, some lonely spouse's bad art store, or some millionaire's curio shop.” That's just more private special interest tax pilfering bullsh*t.”
I’d say you put is as bluntly as is needed. This whole thing is in the mess it’s in because some owners on the Square are involved and thought they could pull a fast one. It is their “mess” to straighten out and they keep trying to push it off on the residents of Wimberley, the State of Texas, most of which couldn’t care less if the whole square gets shut down.
The three local government officials appear to have vested or conflict of interest are:
· Mayor Bob Flocke owns a business at 310 Wimberley Square “Aunt Jenny's Attic”
· Councilman Mac McCullough owns the business at 101 Wimberley Square “Goodies and Stuff”
· Councilman Bill Appleman has a B&B at 400 Mill Race Ln. “Creekhaven Inn”
In my humble opinion, these three shouldn’t be involved with any decisions to fix the Toxic mess on the Square. They should recuse themselves from any studies, deliberations or votes on the problem or its solution. I think they are fine gentelmen and I don’t know if they contribute to the pollution or not but who knows?
Post a Comment