Res 1994-166 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3gC- Page 2 November 10, 1994 The Edwards Aquifer Interlocal Contract (Contract) includes as goals the "fair and equitable management of the Aquifer," the maintenance of "springflows at levels necessary to comply with the Endangered Species Act" and the "increase [of] water supplies in the region and... prevent[ion] [of] over-production and depletion of the Aquifer". An "Edwards Aquifer Liaison Committee" is created "as a coordinating committee" among the parties, but the Committee "has no governance powers in law," and each member district is to "retain their own governing structure and maintain local control" over their respective segments of the aquifer. The contract sets Aquifer Management Guidelines for pumping for each county at the following levels: Hays County 15,000 a-fly Coma I County 30,000 a-fly , . Bexar County 370,000 a-fly Medina County 120,000 a-fly Uvalde County 160,000 a-fly The City's recent annual pumping has averaged 7,000 acre-feet. The Contract expressly provides that these Guidelines "do not constitute allocations," or limits on the amount pumped in each county. The financing portion of the Contract calls for ad valorem taxes, which are unrelated to amounts of water pumped, to be levied in all of the districts, and calls for the EUWD to "request statutory authority" to collect "production fees" based on amounts of water pumped, but MCUWCD and UCUWCD will not collect such fees on amounts of water up to the historic high pumpage in each county. Admirably, the Contract calls for the protection ,of water quality in the aquifer, and the "accurate reporting of production from all wells located within each District." Most agricultural wells are presently unmetered, and their production has only been estimated. S.B. 1477, as you know, was among the most intensely negotiated bills in the 1993 Texas Legislature, and was subjected to broad public debate and extensive revisions prior to final enactment. Although flawed in several respects, the statute nevertheless passed muster against the management concepts for the aquifer contained in your Resolution .1993-33R. The Edwards Aquifer Interlocal Contract fails to meet any of these management concepts: 1. Instead of treating the Aquifer in a unique legal fashion, the Contract depends upon statewide groundwater regulation concepts contained in Chapter 52 of the Water Code. 2. The Contract fails to establish restrictions on the withdrawal of water from the aquifer in order to protect springflow until alternative methods of protecting springflow can be implemented.