Political Influence Costs Taxpayers Millions

[Below is an op-ed piece written by Charlie Wakeem and published by the El Paso Times in yesterday's Sunday paper. It was published under the title of Wakeem: City backslides on development issues. N.B.: Charlie is a gentleman. He won't name names but I will. Brad Roe replaced David Nemir who was a stellar member of the PSB. The attorney for the PSB/EPWU at the time was Bob Andron. Fortunately he retired and was replaced by Lupe Cuellar.]

In light of the recent revelations about the dysfunction and mismanagement in City Hall, I feel it’s time for me to speak about other issues I’m aware of.
One only needs to look at the difference in city government since the 2013 municipal election and decisions City Council has made since then.  Most of the problems are already well-documented, including but not limited to issues with the city manager and Rep. Larry Romero and City Council’s lack of vision and transparency.

I have served on several city boards and committees during the past decade, the latest being the Open Space Advisory Board.  Among others, I also served on the Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite Committee, the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee, the PSB Selection Committee and the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee, which makes recommendations to City Council regarding impact fees.

I was formerly chairman of the Open Space Advisory Board, which advises City Council on the Open Space Master Plan.  I was term-limited from the board last summer.

OSAB accomplished a great deal in the first few years of its existence.  However, things started to change after the 2013 municipal election.  City staff began to keep board members from having a say in setting the agenda and posting items for ineffective and useless Information and Discussion only instead of Action, thereby limiting the collective voice of its citizen board members.

I can only surmise that it’s the people with political and financial influence that are behind the silencing, since OSAB is unpopular with many of those people.
The City spent several years at a cost of millions of dollars, in large part provided in grants by the federal government, for Plan El Paso, El Paso’s nationally-recognized, award-winning comprehensive plan.

It has since been shelved.  Proof of this is that it is no longer available on the city’s web site.  Once again, it seems apparent that some people with influence have convinced the City to ignore it, because Plan El Paso discourages urban sprawl.

Impact fees are strictly regulated by the state and are designed so that new growth pays for itself, instead of the taxpayers or ratepayers subsidizing the new growth.  El Paso has imposed impact fees on new growth for water and wastewater infrastructure since 2009.

Impact fees are calculated by anticipating how many new housing units will be built in new growth areas over a ten year period and the cost of infrastructure to extend water and wastewater service to those new units.  The calculation was originally roughly $2,000 per new water meter (unit) in the city’s three new growth areas when the impact fees were imposed in 2009.  City Council approved 75% of that amount in impact fees.  That left the rest of us still subsidizing new growth for about $500 per unit.

Every five years the state requires impact fees to be recalculated.  In 2014 the El Paso Water Utilities calculated about $35 million more for infrastructure to serve the East and Northeast new-growth areas with a slight increase in the West.

I had term-limited off the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee by then.  The East and Northeast new growth areas are now approximately as much as $4,000 per unit.  The Capital Improvements Advisory Committee, the majority of whose members belong to the El Paso Association of Builders, convinced City Council to withhold any increase.

You and I are now left with subsidizing new growth for water and wastewater costs at up to $2,500 per unit.

Also, in late 2014, the PSB Selection Committee, met to select the engineer position on the PSB.  The incumbent was the very highly qualified David Nemir, who had already served on the board for the previous four years and was eligible for another four year term.  One of the other applicants, who I will not name, was a land development engineer.

There is a policy that land development engineers do not qualify for membership on the PSB due to a possible conflict of interest.  I pointed this out at the meeting.  However, the attorney for the PSB/EPWU said the applicant had recently sold his engineering firm and retired.  If he sold his firm and retired, why is he still representing land development clients at the City?  I’ve personally seen him do so.

The mayor, who serves on the PSB and chairs the selection committee, was absent at this PSB selection meeting.  The selection committee proceeded to re-nominate Dr. Nemir by a wide margin. 

When the committee’s recommendation subsequently went to City Council, the land development engineer was inexplicably appointed in place of Dr. Nemir. City Council has the right to appoint anyone it wants, but we have to ask ourselves whether political influence was involved. 

The best way for citizens to make change is elections.  Let’s choose the candidates with integrity and a vision for our city, who work for us and not self-serving financial interests. 
   
Charlie Wakeem

Should Low Flush Toilet Users Pay a Higher Rate for Their Water?

Want to know what to do with El Paso Electric Company's rate hike proposals and attack on solar?

Western water blogger, John Fleck, informs us today about the fact that using low-flush toilets is helping to conserve water across the country:

"Every toilet currently in stock at my local Home Depot has the EPA WaterSense label, even the cheapest ones, meaning they use 1.28 gallons per flush or less. This is a big part of why we see water use – on a per capita basis, but also in some cases on an absolute basis – going down in the United States."

Before the Energy Policy Act of 1992, toilets used 3 to 5 gallons of water when flushing. After implementation, toilets have used just 1.6 gallons. Now comes the 1.28 gallon per flush toilet. As Fleck shows in his graphs, low flush toilets have really contributed to water conservation (and money savings by owners).

So, why doesn't the El Paso Water Utilities/Public Service Board follow the example of the El Paso Electric Company? Shouldn't low flush toilet owners be put in a separate class of rate-payers who must pay higher rates for their water? These customers are using less water, so according to EPEC's logic, they are not contributing their fair share to the costs of infrastructure.

EPEC wants to put rooftop solar users into a new rate class and make them pay for electrons at a higher rate. They argue that these nefarious solar panel owners are stealing from their neighbors because they don't pay their fair share for new capital projects which benefit EPEC shareholders - not to mention benefiting EPEC executives and board members who are richly compensated for coming up with more ways to make you and me pay more.

So, why doesn't EPWU follow the example of EPEC? I suggest it's because EPWU/PSB has honesty and integrity and is fully aware that water conservation means that there is less of a need for new infrastructure except what's required by water scarcity, a reality all of us share.

Saudis Draining Billions of Gallons of Water from Arizona

Alfalfa Farm under irrigation, San Miquel, California
Picture by Ken Figlloll taken 7-22-12, Flickr creative commons

Nestle and other companies that bottle water continue to drain California of its precious water. (Think about what you are doing when you next buy a case or two of bottled water at the store.) But get this: Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are taking billions of gallons of water from Arizona in the form of hay. Because they have drained their own wells, they can no longer raise alfalfa to produce hay to feed their dairy cattle so they bought land in Arizona with good wells. Read or listen to the NPR story, Saudi Hay Farm In Arizona Tests State's Supply Of Groundwater.

As we know in El Paso, alfalfa likes a long growing season that it can get in the desert southwest. Only problem with that is that alfalfa takes lots of water to grow. Long growing season, lots of water, lots of alfalfa, lots of hay. (My English teachers are now spinning in their graves - well, lots of them.)

Besides the fact that the Saudis can now drain our aquifers, it's the reaction by local Arizona farmers according to the NPR report which astounds me: 

"No one we talked to has issue with these corporations coming in and wanting to make money. And the fact that it's going to Saudi Arabia or China, the locals simply didn't care. But what they did care about is that their water tables are falling. So their domestic wells that they use for their homes are increasingly dropping, and at some point, they're going to lose access to water."

See the problem. They don't object to making money. Capitalism, of course, is the true religion. But they are worried about their water. In this case, making money = using up the water supply. 

It's the same here. Every farmer has a right to make money and plant whatever crop will be the most lucrative. So the aquifer is dropping, the water is getting more brackish, and so the PSB/EPWU must go searching for water to import in the not too distant future. (Some private companies are already doing it.) Yet we should never attempt to regulate what is grown and where. Capitalism is the true religion. 

I sure hope that the Saudis don't buy land here. With the private property laws of Texas and the right of capture rule, we won't have to worry about importing water. All of us will just move to the Pacific Northwest. (I love the Seahawks anyway.)

One last thought. Saudi Arabia and the UAE are exporting billions of gallons of water in the form of hay. How many Syrian refugees are they taking? Hmmm?

Bosque to Get Pipeline from Bustamante

Click on image to enlarge.

From Richard Teschner just now:

"All: Good news. The EPCWID#1 Board just passed, unanimously, Item 1683, which will allow the B-to-B Pipeline to cross over District land. Hooray!"--Richard

The "District" is the El Paso County Water Improvement District #1. Their agreement allows a pipeline to be extended from the Bustamante Treatment Plant directly to the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park. The agreement was necessary because the District owns a narrow strip of unused and abandoned land over which the pipe needs to be laid.

What does this mean? A true wetalands all year round with numerous bird species and other animals nesting and living there. It means more ecotourists and birders coming to El Paso spending money and paying sales tax.

Hooray indeed!

Plan to Attend and Support the Rio Bosque

Please plan to attend and speak out for the pipeline to be extended from the Bustamante Treatment Plant to the Rio Bosque without further delay:

El Paso County Water Improvement District #1 Board Meeting
Wednesday, January 14, 2015 at 8:30 AM
13247 Alameda Avenue, Clint, TX 79836-0749 (MAP)

Here's the background:


In July 2014, El Paso Water Utilities (EPWU) Public Service Board awarded the contract for a pipeline to allow effluent form BWWTP (Bustamante Waste Water Treatment Plant) to flow to the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park.  Construction of the pipeline is almost complete except for where it would cross a drain owned by EPCWID#1. The drain, abandoned for at least 30 years, has been filled in and is nonexistent in the area of the pipeline. Without a license to cross the drain from EPCWID#1, the project will be delayed increasing the costs and unnecessarily complicating the pipeline design. 

EPWU owns the effluent from the RBWWTP which produces an average of 28 million gallons per day, but they have no facilities to hold that water.  Once water enters infrastructure owned by EPCWID#1, as happens today without the pipeline, the water belongs to EPCWID#1.

In the early 1990s Rio Bosque Wetlands Park was identified as the preferred site for a wetland project to mitigate for natural habitat loss caused by the American Canal Extension.  The wetland project at the Park was designed to utilize effluent from the adjacent BWWTP.  Currently, the Park only receives water from BWWTP for a few months in the winter.  To realize its potential for critical habitat restoration, ecosystem services, aquifer recharge, and economic benefit from eco-tourism, the Wetlands Park needs water.

Wetlands ecosystem services provide a myriad of benefits to El Pasoans including clean air, clean water, and aesthetic, cultural and spiritual value. Services provided by wetlands include stormwater storage, nutrient removal and climate regulation.  Using extremely conservative estimates by Robert Costanza, Professor of Public Policy at the Crawford School of Public Policy, the value of the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park ecosystem services would be over $1 million per year.  Using data from the nonprofit independent research group, Headwaters Economics, elpasonaturally (30 September 2011) estimates that the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park could bring $18 million in Eco-Tourism dollars to El Paso. 


Farmers benefit from having water in the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park because it will recharge the aquifer they pump from to irrigate their fields.  The water from the BWWTP will improve the quality of the water in the aquifer which according to Art Ivey is so salty, "We're pouring poison on our [pecan] trees.”  (El Paso Times, 15 Dec 2014).  There is also the possibility of extending the pipeline to a proposed regulating reservoir immediately south of the Park which will capture “tail” water and make it available to farmers.

The Water District maintains that they have reasons to extort money from the EPWU concerns about the project which need to be addressed. John Balliew, CEO of EPWU, says that they are trying to respond to those concerns so that the pipeline can be put on the water district agenda soon. That agenda item has been effectively tabled since the October meeting.

Question to raise: What are the concerns that they have about the pipeline going across abandoned, unused land? (Question for John Balliew and the PSB/EPWU: Why did you not know in the first place that you didn't need easement across this land?)

In spite of State law requiring the water district to post agendas and minutes, the EPCWID#1 still does not do so. No agenda for tomorrow's meeting is posted on their website anywhere.

Several members of the El Paso conservation community plan to attend tomorrow. A letter from State Rep. Joe Moody (District 78) in support of the pipeline will be read.

Why Is the Rio Grande Pipeline Stalled?

El Paso wetlands park has no water!  The pipeline to pass water from the Bustamante Waste Water Treatment Plant (BWWTP) to the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park is on hold.  Most of the project is done, but there is a gap where the pipeline crosses an abandoned drain owned by El Paso County Water Improvement District #1 (EPCWID#1).   To complete the pipeline as designed, El Paso Water Utilities (EPWU) needs a license from EPCWID#1, to cross their drain. 

In the early 1990s, Rio Bosque Wetlands Park was identified as the preferred site for a wetland project to mitigate for natural habitat loss caused by the American Canal Extension.  The wetland project at the Park was designed to utilize effluent from the adjacent BWWTP.  Currently, the Park only receives water from BWWTP for a few months in the winter.  To realize its potential for critical habitat restoration, ecosystem services, aquifer recharge, and economic benefit from eco-tourism, the Wetlands Park needs water.

Water in the Rio Bosque will recharge our aquifer benefiting farmers and all El Pasoans.  The water from the BWWTP will improve the quality of the water in the aquifer which according to Art Ivey, EPCWID#1 Vice President, is so salty, "We're pouring poison on our [pecan] trees.”  (El Paso Times, 15 December 2014).  There is also the possibility of extending the pipeline to a proposed regulating reservoir immediately south of the Park which will capture “tail” water and make it available to farmers.

Wetlands ecosystem services provide a myriad of benefits to El Pasoans including clean air, clean water, and esthetic, cultural and spiritual values.  Services provided by wetlands include stormwater storage, nutrient removal and climate regulation.  Using extremely conservative estimates by Robert Costanza, Professor of Public Policy at the Crawford School of Public Policy, the value of the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park ecosystem services would be over $1 million per year.  Using data from the nonprofit independent research group, Headwaters Economics, ElPasoNaturally (30 September 2011) estimates that the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park could bring $18 million in Eco-Tourism dollars to El Paso. 

The Rio Bosque Wetlands Park is a tremendous classroom in the open.  Visiting children learn critical STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) skills and, if there is water, graduate students utilize the Park for scientific research projects.

In July 2014, EPWU Public Service Board awarded the $1.1 million contract for construction of the pipeline (BWWTP) to the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park.  The project should have been completed by 26 December 2014.  Now, instead of delivering water to the Park, the pipeline is stalled because EPCWID#1 has not issued a license to cross its drain - a drain that is non-functional and has been abandoned for more than 30 years. 

To complete the pipeline, EPWU could bypass the EPCWID#1 land, but that would unnecessarily complicate the pipeline, make it significantly longer, cause additional delays and increase the cost all EPWU ratepayers.

EPWU owns the effluent from the BWWTP, but they have no facilities to hold that water.  Once water enters infrastructure owned by EPCWID#1, as happens today without the pipeline, the water belongs to EPCWID#1.  According to the 2001 Implementing Third-Party Contract, BWWTP delivers 13,333 acre-feet of water to EPCWID#1 each year.  But EPCWID#1 actually receives about 31,000 acre-feet per year, nearly all that BWWTP produces.

Could it be EPCWID#1 wants control of when and how much water enters the pipeline, before they license an easement across their abandoned drain?  EPCWID#1 already controls all the water in the Rio Grande.  Maybe they want to be sure they also control water that belongs to all El Pasoans. 

- Judy Ackerman

What Was Really Insulting at Yesterday's PSB Meeting

In a statement to the El Paso Times, Mayor Leeser explained his "no" vote to the new El Paso Water Utilities proposed budget and rate hikes: "It was insulting to see that type of presentation . . ." Huh? Apparently he objected to a presentation about the budget given a few weeks ago in a public budget hearing and given again yesterday for a vote. At issues seems to be the fact that your water utility will begin showing on your bill in March the amount you pay (10%) that goes back to the city (not counting the amount businesses now pay for the City Council directed tax aka fee). His resposes to Times reporter Vic Kolenc were vague.

Here's the deal: the Mayor's was the only nay vote because he said that he was "insulted". Six other members of the Board - all smart, professional people - were not insulted. Apparently only one person, the Mayor, found the budget presentations "insulting". Word on the street is that the Mayor was engaged in political posturing. He has said on more than one occasion to various people that he believes that the utility should be run by the city not the PSB. In other words, his "nay" vote and his suggestion that he was insulted are, at the least, clear indications of his lack of support for the PSB if not a means to undermine the PSB. 

More proof: the Mayor chairs the PSB selection committee. He did not attend and did not take part in the nearly unanimous highest rating of current board member, David Nemir. When the matter went before Council, he was silent allowing the selection of Brad Roe who has ties with the El Paso Builders Association. One keen observer of El Paso politics commented: "You can bet the Bowlings got the votes [for Roe] from Council." 

You might also want to peruse Oscar Leeser's campaign finance reports of 2013. See how many sprawlers you see listed as giving the big bucks. These are the very people who want to get their hands on all of that PSB land and a shortsighted Council wants to sell off as fast as they can to make up budget shortfalls. (And once you've spent all that you have on bloated credit card expenses, you find that you can't pay for the extravagant purchases you keep making. Imagine the city running the water utility. Just how fast do you think that we will run out of water?)

What was insulting at yesterday's PSB meeting was how the Mayor voted and how he left the meeting with important agenda items still pending and how he does not do his duty to communicate what the PSB is doing to City Council. That is what is insulting and every single El Pasoan should be insulted.

By the way, even with the rate increases, El Paso Water Utilities' rates are still the lowest or second lowest when compared to other Texas cities and to other regional cities in the southwest. Here are the charts:




Save our water. Save our land. Save our PSB.

EPWU Issues New Policy Mindful of Wildlife

A new policy regarding the clearance and dredging of irrigation drains was authorized by EPWU CEO John Balliew this past Friday. The policy was written in response to the massive destruction of animal habitat, including bird nests, and vegetation along the Montoya and Nemexas drains this past summer. That destruction was ordered by El Paso Water Improvement District Manager Jesus "Chuy" Reyes following a brush fire and a complaint by a prominent El Paso attorney. The El Paso Water Utilities was forced to help with the clean-up by prior agreements with the water district.

The extreme clear cutting of the drains resulted in an outcry from people living in that area of the Upper Valley, the El Paso conservation community and wildlife experts. Elpasonaturally had a number of posts about the operation beginning here.

John Balliew acted quickly to develop a new water utility policy that would be more mindful of animal life and vegetation. He put EPWU attorney, Lupe Cuellar, in charge of writing that policy. Ms. Cuellar worked with wildlife experts such as John Kiseda and Rick LoBello of the El Paso Zoo and Urban Wildlife Biologist, Lois Balin, along with leaders in El Paso's open space community. Very significantly she worked with utility field operations - the persons who actually do the work of maintaining the land. The new policy is written as a guide for field management.

Sensitivity to the nesting season and limiting the amount of vegetation to be cleared away during any given operation are central to the policy. Before any work can be done the EPWU's Environmental Planner will make an evaluation. That person has been identified as Valerie Provencio, the utility's archaeologist with expertise in ecology. A calendar governing the scope of operations was adopted as part of the project.

Here is the memorandum stating the policy and initialed by Balliew:

EPWU Canal Clearing Policy 101813

Conflict of Interest

Richard Schoephoerster is both the Dean of the College of Engineering at UTEP and the Chairman of the Public Service Board. Recent open record requested documents clearly show a conflict of interest with regard to the UTEP Reclaimed Water Project and his role as Chairman of the PSB.

As I reported in an earlier post, my first ORR to the EPWU came up short. I made a second request. Frankly, the response to it seems to be lacking as well. Nevertheless, there are some email exchanges that demonstrate that Schoephoerster was very much engaged in inappropriate persuasion for the UTEP project and, in so doing, failed to act as a fiduciary for the PSB/EPWU, his sworn duty.

Although Shoephoerster recused himself as both Chair and voting member when the project was discussed at the PSB in August and again in September, behind the scenes he was quite active in promoting it. His enthusiasm became apparent publicly at the last EPWU strategic planning meeting when he attempted to shut down any discussion that was negative about the Centennial Park project or reclaimed water in general. Although reclaimed water is subsidized, Schoephoerster used some pretty creative sophistry to suggest that it isn't. He recused himself from voting at a PSB meeting prior to the strategic planning meeting, but was quite engaged in the discussion during strategic planning and used his position as Chair to shut down any discussion of doubts raised by PSB member, Dr. Richard Bonart. After the PSB failed to support the project at its September meeting, Schoephoerster exhibited what can only be called peevishness. He very much personally owned the issue.

In fact as shown by ORR docusments, Schoephoerster put together "talking points" for the project. His "talking points" came in the form of a resolution as if he were drafting the motion for a vote. When asked by UTEP Executive Vice President Richard Adauto why he used the form of a resolution, Dr. Schoephoerster at first quipped in an email: "Artistic license? :)" Less than 3 hours later in a follow-up email, he wrote: "I used the 'resolution' form just as a way to organize the information." Ingenuous? CYA? In that same follow-up email to Adauto, the Dean of Engineering and Chairman of the PSB added a P.S.: "David Crowder [El Paso Inc.] is doing a story in next week's Inc. He asked to speak with me but I told him I have no comment due to conflict of interest." No comment to Crowder, but a resolution to Adauto and Balliew. 

He highlights two of his "whereas clauses". In both he touts the "education opportunity to thousands [my emphasis] of UTEP students, faculty, staff and visitors annually" and states that the project "will educate thousands [again my emphasis] of students and their families, along with faculty, staff, and community stakeholders, on responsible water management including the use of reclaimed water."

Nevermind the grandiosity of the resolution, the fact that the program showed no benefit cost, was obviously going to be subsidized by ratepayers (you and me), championed a methodology (reclaimed water) which shows dubious and expensive results and says nothing about rainwater management and capture - a better strategy. What was not noted was the fact that waste (read "crap") from the project would not be recycled at UTEP but would instead go back to the NW Plant to be re-processed - a double whammy not included in the cost overruns. Oh - sorry - they didn't show any cost overruns.

Schoephoerster's resolution is rhetoric with very little sense of reality. He is promoting a program. Why? Missing in the second set of documents (and I requested communications as far back as January 2012) was any discussion of the origin of the project. We are led to believe that it just came to mind and just came to many minds at the same time.

Obviously as early as December 2012 there was some talk about justifying the Centennial Park/UTEP Water Reclamation project. An email from government relations consultant John O'Donnell to Ed Archuleta and others talks about the "[use] of reclaimed water on lands at UTEP" as "another way UTEP and EPWU collaborate to provide a water supply to benefit the University, City and Fort Bliss for environmental and economic sustainability in the high desert." The collaboration with UTEP benefits the City and Fort Bliss? How? Again a program of rainwater capture and management would be much better and more cost effective. Students at UTEP can always go to EPWU reclaimed plants off campus. 

Whatever the origin (and it would seem that it may take a court subpoena finally to get all of the relevant documents especially noting the apparent attempt by EPWU legal to shield Schoephoerster from the first request), the Dean of Engineering was very much involved in seeing that the PSB approve the project. In so doing, he was acting not as a sworn member of the PSB but as a Dean seeking a showcase project (those thousands and thousands of students and their parents). His actions would seem to violate Texas and El Paso ethics laws.

By the way, there is one more interesting twist to Schoephoerster's turning down an interview with David Crowder. An old communications policy of the EPWU/PSB states that only the Chair of the PSB, the CEO and the Vice-President of Marketing can respond to media requests. When a request is made to another board member, that member must turn the request over to the Chair, CEO and VP of Marketing. News is controlled and channeled that way. By denying an interview, Schoephoerster is attempting to shut down press coverage negative to his pet project. Crowder in a September 8, 2013 Inc. article reports on the questions raised about the UTEP project by Dr. Richard Bonart.  On the agenda for tomorrow's PSB meeting the communications policy will be discussed in executive session. Why discuss it in the privacy of executive session and not out in the open with the public present? Could this be an effort to get back at Bonart for dissenting on the UTEP project? The only reason why it would be behind closed doors and away from the public is because it may very well be a means of retaliation. Here's the policy and it needs to be abolished or changed since it comes from an old leadership style that wants no transparency, utilizes subterfuge and makes decisions in the dark behind closed doors:

PSB Communications Policy 

PSB members swear an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States . . . " I guess that the First Amendment is just too darn inconvenient to be covered by the oath.

It would seem that Schoephoerster violated his fiduciary duty and should resign as Chair and member of the PSB. Discussions about communications policies should be made in the open. 

Rainwater Harvesting Would Make a Better Study for UTEP

An expert hydrologist and engineer gave this analysis of the proposed UTEP reclaimed water project/boondoggle: 

"Because of the large area of buildings, sidewalks, bedrock, run on from the campus arroyo and parking lots relative to the green areas, it is straight forward to meet all of UTEP’s landscape watering needs with stormwater (rainwater harvesting) at a cost that is insignificant relative to the proposed plant. The water would also be of much higher quality (very low TDS). Unless there are some hidden cost savings that haven’t been mentioned this appears to be a product of a) poor economic analysis and b) an outdated concept of the water budget, c) typical El Paso politics. We need to move into the future, not optimize yesterday’s solutions."

TDS by the way stands for Total Dissolved Solids. "A high concentration of TDS is an indicator that harmful contaminants, such as iron, manganese, sulfate, bromide and arsenic, can also be present in the water." [Safe Drinking Water Foundation publication]. Arsenic is an issue in El Paso water and may be more so at UTEP which abuts where ASARCO once belched the element.

The project proposed for UTEP could very well take place at the Bustamante plant and could help the Rio Bosque Wetlands park. The Center for Environmental Resource Management (CERM) at UTEP is tasked with water initiatives and it is the same department that already manages the Rio Bosque, now a part of the EPWU inventory.

Speaking about the Rio Bosque: Is doing something there just talk by the EPWU to calm the savages of the environmental community? PSB member, Dr. Rick Bonart, explained: 

"At the February meeting we talked about the Rio Bosque. A formal motion was made to authorize the President and CEO to design and build a pipeline from Bustamante to Rio Bosque to convey either reclaimed H2O or effluent.

"I asked CEO John Balliew how much and how long to do the project.  The anwser: $440,000 and 6 months.

"At the last PSB meeting call to public a member of the public asked when this would be done and Mr. Balliew said it would be on this month's agenda."

Here's the agenda for this Wednesday. Anyone see anything about the Bosque?

Item 3 is about the so-called UTEP Centennial Project.  This message is making the email rounds:

"This Wednesday the PSB will be deciding to fund a request from UTEP to provide a packaged plant to make reclaimed water on campus for use on the campus. Evidently, UTEP is expecting all the rate payers in El Paso to subsidize this project which is primarily to benefit watering some landscaping at Miner Village, Centennial Plaza,  and for the replacement of grass to the Sun Bowl. This seems like a very elitist and preferential burden for all rate payers. Supposedly it is to be a research project for UTEP, but it will be subsidized not by the University or its system, but by local rate payers. As a research project, this researcher asks, 'What is the hypothesis? What is the need? What are the variables? and What prior research does this come out of.'  Whose idea was this anyway?

"I encourage you to attend the PSB meeting this Wednesday and hear what the justifications are for this? There are too many inconsistencies and lack of community participation for this to slide through."

The regular meeting of the Public Service Board will be held at 8:00 a.m., Wednesday, September 11, 2013, at the Public Service Board Meeting Room, 1154 Hawkins Boulevard, El Paso, Texas. Map

Check out David Crowder's story at the Inc.: Questions about UTEP water plant: PSB member says project is waste of money

Red Flags, Red Herrings and Inappropriate Lobbying

Preface: On August 22, 2013 the PSB/EPWU held a Strategic Planning meeting. It was done in house (no outside facilitator this time) and it was done well. It was open and, for the most part as far as anyone can tell, honest. Weaknesses as well as strengths were discussed. Challenges and opportunities were laid out. Prior to the actual meeting, CEO John Balliew directed that meetings with key stakeholders be conducted. I was one of those interviewed. 

One slide presentation did raise a red flag . . . or was it a red herring? Whatever, the impassioned defense which followed from PSB Chairman and UTEP Dean of the College of Engineering, Richard Schoephoerster, was out of line. He has or appears to have a conflict of interest. He should have excused himself from discussion and should recuse himself on any future votes if indeed he is, as I suspect, personally involved in a proposed program to be financed by the EPWU to produce reclaimed water on the UTEP campus.

Here is the title slide of the presentation:

Here is the slide that raised the flag:

The project proposed will produce 70 Acre Feet/year of water for UTEP. In the beginning the water was for irrigating Miner Village but that was too little space to justify that much water. So then it was defended to include the new Centennial Plaza (now being constructed). Again, the xeriscaped area will not be enough to justify 70AF. So, an idea was floated to include re-sodding the Sun Bowl with real grass (not astroturf) in order to attract more soccer games. (UTEP Chancellor Arleigh B. Templeton changed the field in 1973 in order to save water.)The idea for natural grass didn't have traction. So, we are left with more reclaimed water that can be justified by the area required for irrigation.

Why? The quid pro quo could be that EPWU with ratepayer funds finances a water reclamation process (such as Ovivio) and, in return gets research. The project coincides with a new engineering program, Water Initiatives, now being led by former EPWU CEO Ed Archuleta.

In an email sent on September 3, 2013, the Consumer or Citizens Advocacy member of the Public Service Board, Dr. Rick Bonart, wrote to me and John Balliew the following:

"The Public Service Board, at the September meeting [Item #3 on 9/11/13 agenda], is being asked to approve what I think is an extremely selfish request from UTEP. It's basically a 6 million dollar toy, disguised as a research project. Needless to say, I'm completely opposed. Let me explain why.

"The request is for a packaged plant to make reclaimed water on campus. To be worthy of funding by the utility, the UTEP reclaimed water project  must create value for the rate payer. Unfortunately, the parameters of this endeavor are so ill-defined, that determining if there is any value in this project is impossible.

"What determined the size, and need, and who requested the project?  The plant will make 70 acre/feet of water enough for 18 acres of turf. I was originally told the water was for landscaping the southwest corner of Miner Village. When, I questioned why the need for so much water for such a small parcel, I was told the water was also for the new Centennial Plaza.  When, I pointed out Centennial Plaza is only 10.6 acres and xeriscaped, I was then told the additional capacity  was to provide water that would enable UTEP to change the Sun Bowl's surface from Astro Turf back to grass.  Now, in Mr. Balliew's latest response, UTEP will not be changing the Sun Bowl's surface. 

"Mr. Balliew admits the project doesn't make economic sense, but  goes on to explains "financial reward isn't the only criteria the utility judges and approves projects." I agree financial concerns are not the only consideration for building a project. However, when the agreement benefits just one party to such an egregious degree, it's unacceptable.  

"In my opinion, the current reclaimed water system is a logistic and financial boondoggle. Reclaimed water is an inferior product, that can only be used by a few customers, on select vegetation. The utility makes reclaimed water for $496/ an acre foot and sells it for $51 an acre foot. EPWU must annually subsidize reclaimed water with $3 Million dollars of rate payer money (a 90% subsidy). Compared to the current reclaimed water cost, the UTEP project is a quantum leap in the wrong direction. Reclaimed water produced at the UTEP plant will cost about $4500 an acre foot, that's a 900%  subsidy.

"While some  will defend the above subsidy saying "look how much water it saves", I want to point out that, while reclaimed water saves 6750 acre feet of water, we concurrently and for years, waste 15,000 to 20,000 acre feet of water by giving it away to EPWD#1.  Reclaimed water is an evolutionary dead end. Mr. Balliew understands these short comings and thankfully is rapidly transitioning the utility to purified water.

"Finally, we have the theory this is a "research project".  At best this project will be a duplication of effort. It will divert valuable resources needed for real research. There is nothing innovative about a package unit designed and built  by others with current technology.

"EWPU was recently awarded $100,000 by the Army Corps of Engineers, seed money for such a research project at Bustamante/Rio Bosque. Using those funds at Bustamante makes perfect sense. Processes developed at that facility could easily be scaled up from prototype to production and distributed to all customers without subsidy. Purified water production at Bustamante has the potential to increase our total municipal water supply by 15 to 20%, and it's drought proof. Reprogramming the UTEP reclaimed water funds to the project at Bustamante will accelerate development . Bustamante is a research project UTEP should be willing to both participate in and contribute to. If we truly want to do research on purified water, the project should be at Bustamante/Rio Bosque, where the whole community will benefit. 

"In it's present form the UTEP project does not create value for the rate payer.

"As a member of The Public Service Board, I have a fiduciary responsibility to the rate payers, not UTEP.  The PSB should not proceed with this poorly conceived project, but focus the utility's efforts and resources on a research facility at Bustamante to  innovative purified water production that will create real value for the rate payers and the whole community."

Rick Bonart

Citizen Advocate PSB


This post is just Part 1.

EPWU Needs an Office of Ecology

Here is my email message to PSB Board member, Dr. Rick Bonart.  He is meeting with CEO John Balliew tomorrow regarding several open space issues. I have asked that my recommendations be passed along:


Rick,

It should be the established policy of the PSB/EPWU to manage City-owned land in its inventory with wildlife, wildlife habitat and environmental protection and quality in mind.  Rather than reacting to situations by radically changing the topography as was the case with the Montoya Drain and the arroyo at Robinson, Canyon Terrace and Sierra Crest intersections, long-term plans for management which include thinning out dry vegetation and so forth should be the norm.  Any work on an area should attempt to protect wildlife and wildlife habitat as well as plant life as much as possible.  Nesting and mating seasons should be avoided when large removal of vegetation is required.  Mitigation should be part of any plan that changes the topography.  For example, prior to the wholesale destruction of vegetation and habitat along the Montoya drain, plans for re-vegetation should have already been made.  Of course, such wholesale destruction could have been prevented by a long-term plan that would include thinning out dry vegetation that created a fire hazard.  Mitigation at the Montoya drain/canal should be implemented immediately.  Working with organizations such as the West Texas Urban Forestry Council, reforestation should begin.  It is not simply a matter of re-planting and re-establishing a living ecosystem, but it is critical that the canals have some shading to prevent extra loss from evaporation now that there is no shade.  

It would be wise for the PSB/EPWU to hire an Ecology Officer to review and help plan all projects.  PSB/EPWU already has archaeologists on staff.  Fort Bliss, White Sands and other organizations that have responsibility for public land have ecology officers/offices.  The Officer must be degreed and experienced in ecology, wildlife management and so forth.  The job qualifications must be written with such experience in mind.  Policy should give this Officer broad enough powers to be effective.

Please pass this idea on to Mr. John Balliew when you speak with him.  It is my hope that the matter be taken up immediately by the PSB.  It should also become a regular part of its Strategic Planning.

Sincerely,

Jim Tolbert

Flushing Water Hydrants Need Not Be a Water Waster

Flushing fire hydrants is a waste of water.  Water conservation is now critical. There is a system that reduces the waste from flushing hydrants: NO-DES.  John Balliew, the President/CEO of PSB/EPWU says this about this exciting device:

"As far as our flushing [EPWU's not the Fire Department's], we budgeted the device described in the [embedded video] below and will be purchasing it shortly.  We did a pilot test late last year and it works nicely.  This truck mounted system allows us to flush for water quality purposes without wasting any water."

Way to go John, the PSB and EPWU!  Here's the NO-DES promotional video:

Dry Wetland

Sad to report that effluent from the Water Improvement District to the Rio Bosque has stopped.  

Not only that but in spite of the water district’s finally allowing the transfer of water rights to the Bosque by private landowners, there are apparently still some hold-ups.  Charlie Wakeem chronicles his attempts to transfer his water rights and I make some comments in a blog post: When a Water Right Isn’t a Water Right. El Paso Water Improvement District General Manager Chuy Reyes visited Senator Rodriguez’s Environmental Committee and answered their questions last week.  I was in attendance.  Here’s the bottom line: The Board of the Water District should give Mr. Reyes a raise. He is discharging his fiduciary responsibility by serving his customers – those small tract owners and large farmers who pay to have their land irrigated.  Given the drought, every drop is dedicated and directed toward paying customers. Thus, the Bosque is not going to get any more water even after a turnout is constructed by the water district from the canal into the Bosque.  The Rio Bosque Wetlands Park may get water in wet years to come – but not now.  Moreover, people with water rights will discover that they won’t be successful giving their water to the Bosque.  If they aren’t going to use it, then the paying customers are first in line.  This means that the only way that the Bosque can be guaranteed a regular supply of water is for the EPWU (which now holds the Bosque in its inventory of land) to deliver the water directly from the Bustamante plant by constructing a nearly half-million dollar pipeline – chump change really.  EPWU dumps water from the plant into the District’s waterway because it is obligated to give so much water back to the District and because it cannot now deal with some of its excess. That excess (if it is treated) can go to the Bosque. The water district will lose it – but then they could have given some of that free water to the Bosque just as effluent.

There is now even some question whether the Bosque has already received the acre feet of water from EPWU that was agreed upon.  Because of this uncertainty, new PSB Chairman Richard Schoephoerster does not want to put construction of the new pipeline on the agenda.  In my opinion, the PSB may be losing sight of the reason for the water and why it assumed the park into its inventory from the City: saving the Rio Bosque and turning it into the $18 Million eco-tourist attraction that it can become not to mention its value as a research center.  What needs to happen is a selection of a Bosque Planning Committee that can define a vision for the area and set a business plan.  Environmentalist, Judy Ackerman, says:

"It is well documented that the excess of 7,000 acre feet per season of effluent from the Bustamante belongs to EPWU.  PSB currently has two choices.  You can give that water away for FREE to Hudspeth County OR you can use it to recharge our own aquifer for a long term sustainable solution for the water needs or your customers.  Keeping your water on your land has multiple additional benefits such as scientific research opportunities, a world class wetlands park on an international boarder in an economically struggling area, and many more benefits." 

Someone needs to begin asking why EPWU and Water District policies seem to favor Hudspeth farmers with their full reservoirs. 

One more thought. Farmers around here raise some pretty water intensive crops: cotton and pecans come to mind.  Both crops are far more profitable than other crops that require less water.  So for the gain of immediate profit and personal enrichment, some farmers in our area will impoverish future generations of water.  Here’s the thought: perhaps water districts by law should have to go to a tiered system of billing just as the EPWU does with you and me.  If I use a little bit of water, I buy it at a pretty good rate.  If I leap into the next tier of water use, then my rate more than doubles.  Water conservation would be encouraged. Remember the Iroquois maxim:  “In our every deliberation, we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations.”  This beats the heck out of that slogan that says that “he who dies with the most toys wins.”

I have said just about all that I can say about the ASARCO stacks.  You can read my final (probably, maybe penultimate) blog post for now. I have spoken with environmental engineers who tell me that the $50 Million for clean-up was a fraction of what was really needed.  One of them told me that there is no way that even a sprinkler can keep dust from spreading when the concrete stacks are brought down and hit the ground at a high impact speed.  What plans are there for mitigating UTEP, Kern Place, Anapra, Juarez, etc. after the impact lifts dust into the air?  Bottom line from engineers: heavy metals have leeched into the ground and will make their way to the river. The material used to encapsulate contaminated materials in the Parker Brothers Arroyo will give way eventually - perhaps as early as 20 years.  Expert environmental engineers advise that we must be vigilant about monitoring for generations to come. Some places on the Asarco site (not all and not the majority of the area) must never be built upon.

Please sign the Complete Streets Petition.  A complete street “will accommodate all road users, regardless of age, ability, or mode of transportation.  Complete streets might include sidewalks, bike lanes, cycle tracks, wide paved shoulders, special bus lanes, comfortable and accessible transit stops, frequent crossing opportunities, median islands, accessible pedestrian signals, or curb extensions.” Get information and sign the petition.  Scroll down the page; there are links to much more information.  Bike Texas has complete streets as part of their legislative agenda which also includes safe passing and a ban on texting while driving.

And while we are on the subject of Bike Texas, be sure to read an article by our own Beth Nobles, Executive Director of Texas Mountain Trail. She writes about a way to earn dollars for a favorite charity through a new iPhone or Android app called Charity Miles. The program is for walkers, runners and bikers. Beth is also the oomph behind Peak Fitness Challenge along with Don Baumgardt of GeoBetty.  Keeping El Paso naturally means keeping our Trans-Pecos/Southwestern New Mexico region naturally and fit as well. (And charitable.)

For great hikes and events just check out El Paso Hiking Group, GeoBetty, Guadalupe Mountains National Park Meetup Group,  Las Cruces & El Paso Adventurists, Peak Fitness Challenge,  High Desert Hikers and Las Cruces Hiking Meetup. 

If you want a recreational and educational excursion in the El Paso/Las Cruces area, sign up for one of the Back by Noon events sponsored by the Southwest Environmental Center.  See a Back by Noon poster.

Congratulations to El Paso Zoo Education Curator, Rick LoBello, this year's recipient of the annual El Paso Trans Pecos Audubon Society Conservation Award.

By the way, join the Auduboners on a field trip this Saturday, Feb. 23, to the Holloman Lakes and Dog Canyon.  You'll drive north on US 54 about 1-1/2 hours to Alamogordo, then US 70 to the Holloman Lakes.  This area in an Important bird area.  Then picnic and bird at Oliver Lee State Park.  There is a fee of $5 per vehicle.  After lunch the group plans to take a short hike up Dog Canyon.  Meet at Lowe's Parking Lot, 4531 Transmountain Road behind Taco Bell at 7:00 a.m.  Bring lunch, binoculars, water and a scope if you have one.  Beginners and nonmembers are welcome.  Contact Mark Perkins at 637-3521 for more information.

Check out the Permaculture Workshop this Saturday at the Memorial Park Garden Center.

Not just a coffee table book – Cacti of Texas by El Pasoans, Gertrude and Ad Konings, should be in the library of every Chihuahuan Desert recreationalist.

Finally and sadly we note the passing of Kathy Goodell, the wife of Dr. Phil Goodell.  Read her obituary.  You will recall that the Goodells recently gave $1 Million to UTEP’s College of Science for a center of entrepreneurial geosciences.

 

Small Is Beautiful

I'm a candidate for City Council District 2. Please visit www.jimtolbert.com and like us on our Facebook page. 

Read, mark and digest: Why smarter land use can help cities attract and retain young adults.  Particularly look at the data at the end of the post revealing what researchers discovered about Millennials (people born from 1979 to 1996 – my kids are in this group):  prefer to live in a core city, desire walkability, value diversity, emphasize connectedness (ergo, the success and soaring popularity of social media).

It’s not just Millennials.  A baby boomer (my generation) couple who are friends of mine are not just interested in the small house concept (think adobe construction for the southwest) but in co-housing where “dining room and kitchen, lounge, recreational facilities, children’s spaces, and frequently a guest room, workshop and laundry room” are held in common.  It’s easy to see that space is developed conservatively and sprawl isn’t even part of the equation. Neighbors know each other and form communities.

So, when we talk about “infill” and walkability and downtown re-development, think Millennials, the creative class, small houses and co-housing. Take a look at what code allows for building materials. This is not to take away from what business models we have – but to encourage greater flexibility in design and planning. 

Persons interested in the real estate market may want to read a December 2011 post from Ken Bennfield’s blog.

Think water smart homes too.  The EPWU/PSB is convening a cutting-edge committee to look at what goes into (and outside of) a water smart home. Read the scope of work for this committee. There are three meetings tentatively planned for this committee on Mondays February 18^th, March 4^th and 11^th from 6 to 8 p.m. at TecH2O.  They are open to the public.  Members of the committee can be found in the Scribd presentation at elpasonaturally.  Two more members have been invited and have accepted: Jennifer Barr and Dr. John Walton both of whom will enrich the committee’s work.  After their work, residential plumbing codes for El Paso should be reviewed IMHO.

Rhonda Berry, President and CEO of Our City Forest (also on Facebook) recently cited another study that shows the “growing evidence that the natural environment provides major public health benefits.”  New EPWU CEO, John Balliew, at a recent breakfast meeting said that EPWU’s conservation initiatives never suggested the overuse of concrete and asphalt as landscape solutions. He suggested people visit the grounds of TecH2O. EPWU even promotes water smart plants.  Learn about the City’s Memorial Tree Program. Rep. Susie Byrd’s office recently donated a tree to Newman Park in memory of my mother, Margaret Hudson Tolbert.

Texas Parks and Wildlife has recommended a better alternative entrance to the Tom Mays Unit of the Franklin Mountains State Park. Posts about the route can be found here and here.  On January 24^th the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission approved the transfer of eight acres plus to TxDOT for the construction of the new underpass, bike and vehicle route and animal corridor for the park.

Speaking about the Franklin Mountains State Park, see their February schedule of events and hiking.  For great hikes and events just check out El Paso Hiking Group, GeoBetty, Guadalupe Mountains National Park Meetup Group,  Las Cruces & El Paso Adventurists, Peak Fitness Challenge,  High Desert Hikers and Las Cruces Hiking Meetup.

Not just a coffee table book – Cacti of Texas by El Pasoans, Gertrude and Ad Konings, should be in the library of every Chihuahuan Desert recreationalist.

El Paso history comes alive with Melissa Sargent and Jackson Polk every Saturday morning from 10 to Noon on the El Paso History Radio Show on KTSM AM 690 Talk Radio.  This Saturday Melissa and Jackson  welcome some Harvey Girls and hear about their role in railroad history . We talk with President Dehrkoop and a master mistress re-enactor, Patricia Kiddney, who will portray several of the old West famous women. On February 16 El Paso City Manger Joyce Wilson is on hour one to talk about preservation of downtown buildings.

Finally, here is a really cool, grand idea: Klyde Warren Park.  Read the story in Parks & Recreation. Talk about finding park space and connectivity!

EPWU Monitors Low Lake Levels at Elephant Butte

Below is a press release dated today from EPWU. Now is a good time to follow them on Facebook, Twitter and even YouTube. 

EPWU's media contact is Martin Bartlett, Public Information Specialist, mbartlett2epwu.org, 
915-594-5510

February 4, 2013

EPWU continues to monitor low lake levels at Elephant Butte

Photos, videos share drought’s impact via social media platforms

EL PASO – Elephant Butte Lake remains less than four percent full of water available to downstream users, including El Paso Water Utilities and its customers.

While the number is telling, recent photos of the lake are even more striking. During the week of February 4-8, 2013, EPWU will dedicate its social media platforms to sharing photos and videos which demonstrate the drought’s impact on Elephant Butte Lake.

In a typical summer, EPWU pumps half of its water supply from wells in the city. The other half comprises water released from Elephant Butte Lake into the Rio Grande. However, continued drought in New Mexico and Colorado means less river water than usual will be available to El Paso.

“El Paso Water Utilities plans to make up the difference by relying more heavily on well water,” said EPWU President & CEO John E. Balliew, P.E. “We’re preparing by drilling new wells and building new pipelines to more efficiently move that water around the city.”

Much of the water stored at Elephant Butte Lake starts as rain and snowfall during the winter months in New Mexico and Colorado. The on-going drought, temperatures, wind speeds, and even humidity in those regions dictate how much of that water eventually reaches El Paso, Balliew explained.

“The bottom line is that we expect less river water again this year,” he said. “For now, it’s just too early to know how much less.”

The region’s on-going drought should serve as a reminder of the constant need to conserve in our desert community. Visit LessisMoreEP.org for drought updates and information on how you can conserve water.

EPWU Video of Elephant Butte:

Balliew Chosen CEO

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

December 12, 2012

Public Service Board selects Balliew

as President & CEO of El Paso Water Utilities

                                                      

EL PASO – The Public Service Board has selected John E. Balliew, P.E., to serve as the President & CEO of El Paso Water Utilities.

Balliew, a native El Pasoan, currently serves as the utility’s Vice President of Operations and Technical Services. He oversees operation of the utility’s six water treatment plants, 150 groundwater wells, the system of pipes and reservoirs which deliver and stores water around the city, and the maintenance and operation of EPWU’s stormwater management system.

After graduating with a Bachelor of Science degree in chemical engineering from Texas A&M University, Balliew returned to his hometown and began work as a laboratory technician at EPWU. He rose quickly within the organization, holding several leadership positions before being named Vice President in 2007. He has served the Utility for nearly 30 years.

Balliew is a licensed professional engineer and was named by the El Paso Chapter of the Texas Society of Professional Engineers as its Engineer of the Year in 2012 and its Young Engineer of the Year in 1992.

During his career at EPWU, Balliew has been directly involved in many of the innovative projects which have helped secure El Paso’s water future. Those projects include construction of the Kay Bailey Hutchison Desalination Plant, expansion of groundwater resources, and on-going projects designed to mitigate the impacts of the region’s on-going drought.

The board engaged the services of Bob Murray and Associates to lead a nationwide search for the new President and CEO who will oversee EPWU’s water, wastewater, reclaimed water and stormwater divisions. Balliew, who was selected from a field of more than 40 applicants, will replace Edmund G. “Ed” Archuleta, P.E., who is retiring after leading the utility for 24 years. Archuleta will remain on the job into 2013 to oversee the transition.