Res 1996-109 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

{vflJ Mr. Mark Taylor June 17, 1996 Page 3 - si tuated parties, we expect that those opportunities will be limited by the distinct characteristics of the various defendant parties. For example, while San Marcos' position in the Sierra Club v. Babbitt litigation was normally aligned with that of the Ci ty of New Braunfels and New Braunfels utili ties, . in this litigation the fact that New Braunfels/NBU have converted approximately 95% to surface water makes their defensive position in the litigation very different from San Marcos which we { understand remains 100% reliant upon the Aquifer for its municipal ; water supplies. Unfortunately, due to the lead time necessary to successfully convert to surface water, it is unlikely, at least in the near future, that San Marcos would be able to accomplish such a conversion. Somewhat more similarly situated to San Marcos' current predicament than New Braunfels/NBU would be the Bexar Metropolitan Water District. However, here again, BexarMet has contracts with the Bexar-Medina-Atascosa Counties WCID No. 1 for surface water and with the Kleberg interests for a site proximate to the Medina River to construct a surface water treatment plant in the next 6 to 12 months that would place BexarMet at least partiallY on a surface water system as opposed to 100% Aquifer reliant.' Accordingly, while opportunities to develop joint defense strategies that might result in cost sharing and savings to the City exist, those opportunities will probably be somewha.t limited with the "traditional parties" the City has historically been aligned with in the Aquifer litigation. Probably the best opportunity for the development of a joint defense group capable of sharing in the City's cost of litigation would be within the class of pumpers the City has been named to represent in the litigation, ~, all municipal, industrial, commercial, domestic and livestock pumpers in Hays County, Texas. Among that group would be Southwest Texas State University, 1 all water utilities operating in Hays County that pump from or buy water pumped from the Edwards Aquifer (~, Elim Water Co., Crystal Clerk, Maxwell, etc.), and any substantial industrial or irrigation pumpers with combined production of probably 25,000 gallons per day or more. While the opportunities to receive substantial contributions from these respective entities (other than Southwest Texas) may be limited, the combined contributions might form a considerable reimbursement to the City of its overall costs in the litigation. A less tangible benefit, but a worthwhile one in such a joint 1 As State the University will probably be a agency represented by the Attorney General, unless it receives permission to participate in a joint defense group with outside counsel.