Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Water Resources Advisory Committee - 04/03/1996 Minutes Water Conservation Advisory Committee April 3, 1996 The meeting was called to order by Dr. David McNichols and James Dodsan at 1:10 p.m. Members present included Dr. David McNichols,Allan Schoen, Ford Patton, Eugene Urban, Herman R.Johnson,Tony Alejandro, Caralee Dibble,Terry Boone, Charles Spence, Gene Dressen,Jim Naismith, Ray Allen, Richard L. Garza, Mickey Garza, Russell Miget, Douglas Matthews,John McHugh, Dan Davis, Billy W. Dick, Carola G. Serrato, Don King,Jerry Kane, Darlene Locke,Jim Parker, Richard Gonzales, Robert Johanson, Richard Hessee,James Gill,W.T.Young and Mark Smith. Staff members present included Juan Garza,James Dodson, Eduardo Garana, Hubert Hall,Yolanda R. Marruffo and Maria Bazan-Garcia. Visitors included Jaro Blahuta,Jr.of the Nueces County Water Control& Improvement District No.3 in Robstown,Ancel Newman of SLCC-Mathis, Hugh Vickers of the City of Mathis, Paul Werner,retired employee of the City of Corpus Christi, Joe Burke of the City of Portland and Eddie Flores of KRIS-TV. Several corrections were made to the minutes of March 25, 1996. The revised minutes will reflect the attendance of Ford Patton of the City of Beeville. Information regarding Billy Dick will reflect the City of Rockport rather than the City of Portland. Additionally,the minutes will reflect the comment made by Bill Hennings, Deputy City Manager, regarding the City's inability to add additional information to the current billing system such as feebates and comparison of historical water use to encourage water conservation. Allan Schoen motioned to approve the minutes as corrected and was approved unanimously by the Committee. Eugene Urban moved and it was seconded by Mickey Garza to leave James Dodson as interim facilitator. Dr. McNichols expressed that the committee felt comfortable with the arrangement. The Committee voted unanimously. Mr. Dodson requested that the Committee add to the agenda discussion on freshwater inflow targets for May and June. Jerry Kane asked that discussion on Lake Texana interbasin transfers be added to the agenda. The Committee approved the amendment to the agenda. Mr. Dodson presented discussion regarding the options for reducing the May and June estuary inflow with regards to pass through targets. He provided the Committee with information which discussed the issue and the three options for the Committee to consider. Mr. Dodson felt that the City would like to be in a position to capture any significant inflow in the reservoir system that might occur during May and June. The first option supported the implementation of the drought contingency provisions of the Agreed Order with TNRCC. Section 2.B.(1)of the 1995 Agreed Order provides that when the reservoir system storage is less than 40%, but equal to or greater than 30%,the City may reduce the target inflows to 1,200 acre-feet per month,provided that the City implements Condition II of the Water Conservation and Drought Contingency Plan. Mr.Dodson stated that the Water Conservation and Drought Contingency Plan gave the City Manager authority to implement elements of Condition II through a phase-in approach,which could be done over several months depending on the water supply situation. Mr. Dodson reviewed Option 2 wherein the City would seek emergency relief from the May and June freshwater inflow targets under Section 11.148 of the Texas Water Code without going into Condition II of the Drought Contingency Plan. Mr. Dodson stated that the burden would be on the City to prove to TNRCC that an emergency situation existed. The City would have to request TNRCC Commissioners for relief,which would not be supported by the agency staff unless the City enacted more mandatory water use restrictions than are presently contained in Condition I of the Drought Contingency Plan. Option 3 proposed to amend the Agreed Order to add some relief from targets under Condition I. Mr. Dodson stated that Option 3 suggested that there would be some"credit"given to the City for going into Condition I of the Drought Contingency Plan. It could be some reduction in the monthly inflows targets, but not the full reduction available under Condition II. He expressed concern that this option would be unacceptable to the public since it might not appreciably improve the ability to capture inflows. Dr.McNichols asked the Committee for input on the appropriate option to take to reduce the May/June inflow targets. He expressed that while freshwater releases needed to be part of any permit for storage and diversion, he felt that public sentiment refutes freshwater releases in light of drought conditions. He also pointed out the value of obtaining the permit that contains the inflow requirements,stating that if we did not have Choke Canyon,we'd only have 39,000 acre feet of water available in Lake Corpus Christi at the present time. Discussion followed on the pros and cons of going to TNRCC for emergency relief. An obvious and favorable part of entering Condition II is that the City would be allowed to reduce its freshwater releases from 25,000 acre feet to 1,200 acre feet during May. Dr.McNichols stated that there is hesitation to going to Condition II in that it sends a SCANNED r ' negative signal toward future construction and commercial businesses,while immediately impacting certain construction activities through the limited use of fire hydrants. He stated that the community will do their part as long as restrictions do not impose on their livelihood. He pointed out that our per capita water use is among the lowest in the state. • Ford Patton stated that the wholesale water users would be critically affected if the Lake Corpus Christi level dropped below 79 to 80 feet. He stated that the community of Beeville would have a difficult time achieving a 30 percent reduction in water use. Richard Garza stated that when lake reaches below 83 feet,the city of Alice cannot access water at Lake Corpus Christi. Mickey Garza expressed that the TNRCC would entertain comments from the Committee. He felt that the public does not understand how critical our water situation is and felt that TNRCC would probably rescind the May and June releases. Mr.Patton moved and it was seconded by Jerry Kane to recommend to the City Council to adopt Option 2. Mr. Ford expressed that there was sufficient information to declare an emergency. City Manager Juan Garza acknowledged that we are facing an emergency water situation and that we need to obtain relief from the freshwater inflow targets for the May and June period. He felt that we needed an opportunity to capture May and June rainfall.- He expressed preference towards Option 1. Dr. McNichols stated that we could avoid economic hardship by negotiating in good faith with TNRCC. He expressed hope to phase in Condition II over a six month period. If we did not get any inflows,then we could go fully into Condition II. Jim Naismith stated that Austin is not fazed by our economic conditions. Eugene Urban stated that the cities of Mathis and Alice take water directly from Lake Corpus Christi near the Wesley Seale Dam, but that Beeville's intake was located in the river channel at the upper end of the lake. He felt that a small intake pool could be created at that location to help Beeville if the lake level dropped too far. Ray Allen stated that Condition II spreads the pain to both commercial and shrimping industry. He foresees that exemptions would be requested by the commercial sector. Juan Garza stated that the plan allows for flexibility to amend or use discretion to adopt portions of the plan. Mr.Allen asked if the plan would prohibit water to be diverted to the bay first. Mr.Garza confirmed that freshwater releases that benefit the shrimping industry would be the first to be cut. Carola Serrato inquired about the procedure for going to TNRCC to request a waiver of the freshwater inflow targets. She stated that if the Committee chose to recommend a phase-in approach to Condition II under Option 2 and the TNRCC rejected the request,the City Council would still have sufficient time to declare Condition II in effect possibly by early May. Mr. Kane expressed the need to avoid the impact of losing the ability to capture 46,500 acre feet of water in May and June. Ms.Serrato stated that if we recommend an amended Option II,we would have met our obligation to the public by requesting relief from TNRCC. Discussion followed if we would be placing blame on TNRCC if the relief on freshwater releases was not granted. Juan Garza expressed preference on Option 1. He felt that it was important that we not show that we were not placing the TNRCC in a spot. Mr. Patton stated that everyone present is arguing for their constituents. He felt that if we face a loss of 46,500 acre feet,the cities of Beeville and Alice would be severely affected. He stated that it was not a matter of years, but a matter of feet whereby the two cities would be without water. The Committee voted 13 in favor of and 15 against recommending Option 2. Ray Allen moved and it was seconded by Allan Schoen to recommend Option 1, with amendments to allow the City Manager to phase-in Condition II of the Drought Contingency Plan to the City Council. The Committee voted 22 in favor of and 2 against. Ray Allen moved and it was seconded by Allan Schoen to recommend to the City Council to implement Condition 11 of the Drought Contingency Plan on or about May 1, 1996. The Committee voted 22 in favor of and 3 against. Mr. Dodson stated that before we move into Condition II,we need to move into Condition I of the plan. Ray Allen stated that in order to avoid freshwater releases in May,we needed to be in Condition II. Mr.Alejandro asked if the City Council had declared Condition I. Juan Garza stated that the City Council would consider this at an upcoming meeting. Richard Hessee felt that the Committee was getting ahead of itself by moving into Condition II. Discussion followed on the transfer of water from Lake Texana. Mr. Kane asked if the Council received communication of the Committee's intent to move with haste toward the development of interbasin transfers. Mr. Dodson stated that the motion previously made on March 20, 1996 was communicated to the Council. Discussion followed on the proposed lawn watering ordinance. The Committee felt that it would be difficult to enforce the runoff of water which would be considered waste. Ray Allen moved and it was seconded by Richard Garza to strike Section s(a)(5)and (b)2)of the draft ordinance as it relates to excessive use of water. The Committee voted 17 in favor of and none opposed. Discussion followed on the inconsistency of language in the Drought Contingency Plan. Mr. Dodson stated that Council Member Ed Martin expressed concern with the language in Section 2.1 Drought Situation Water Conservation and Rationing Plan Summary(page 55-58)and Section 2.2 Drought Contingency Plan (pages 59-72). Regarding Mr. Martin's concern about section 2.1.6, Gene Dressen suggested that the committee recommend to change the language from"rationing plan"to"drought contingency plan". The committee discussed the need to make all portions of Section 2.1 consistent with Section 2.2. Terry Boone asked about the value of having a summary to the plan. Mr. Dodson stated that the summary is the only place that reflects the trigger levels. Mr. Boone suggested that the trigger levels be incorporated into Section 2.2 of the Drought Contingency Plan. Mr. Naismith agreed that the substance in the summary needed to be incorporated into the plan. The Committee recognized the need to amend the entire plan. A recommendation was made to place the amendment of the plan at the beginning of the next agenda when more members were present. The next meeting was set for April 17, 1996 at 1 p.m. With no further business,the meeting was adjourned at 4:05 p.m.