So where's the water coming from?

In my last post I linked to stories in the Hudspeth County Herald which claimed that Torchlight Energy Resources (our local frackers) were getting between 80,000 to 84,000 gallons of water per day from the City of El Paso for one of their fracking wells. Yet El Paso Water Utilities has not sold any water to Torchlight. That leaves local water haulers. However Mr. John Balliew, CEO of the EPWU, points out that the two independent haulers who buy water from the utility could not possibly be supplying that much water to Torchlight if at all.

According to Balliew, although haulers don't specify what they do with the water that they buy from the utility, most of the water hauled is for construction purposes - dust control and compaction.

There are two haulers who serve the Colonias - Lujan Trucking and Mountain View Water Haulers. Balliew said that they each average about 12,500 gallons per day. That is "about the consumption of one apartment complex with a 3" meter or perhaps 75 single family homes," Balliew told me. 

"If they are hauling to the frackers they cannot be hauling much water to the Colonias and vice versa," Balliew said. 

Since the amount of water bought by haulers isn't out of the ordinary, it does not warrant taking any action by EPWU to limit the amount of water which it sells to the haulers. 

So, where does the water come from? John Turner, the Rancher, or perhaps Horizon Regional M.U.D.?

Checking.

EPWU Premiers New Water Purification Pilot Facility

CEO John Balliew welcomes visitors and gives an introduction to the plant and the need for it.

The El Paso Water Utilities (EPWU) unveiled their new water purification pilot facility at the Bustamante Wastewater Treatment Plant this morning. More than 60 visitors consisting of the general public, EPWU employees, some PSB members and other officials learned more about the process, took a tour and viewed a video. Their reaction: Wow!

EPWU wastewater plants clean water for use in irrigation and industrrial porcesses and aquifer recharge. Because of drought and low river water allocations, our water utility is pumping more water from the aquifer which cannot be replenished quickly. So EPWU is considering a number of options to ensure water supply to its service district - us. "Advanced Water Purification is a drought-proof sustainable option."

The Advanaced Water Purification Pilot Plant is critical for a sustainable water supply for El Paso's future. 

There are several steps in the process. First, nitrates and nitrites are removed from the reclaimed water. Then solids, bacteria, portozoa and some viruses are removed by a filtration system. Two systems are currently being tested: microfiltration and ultrafiltration. The third step of nanofiltration and reverse osmosis removes dissolved salts, metals and dissolved organic molecules "and other materials many of which are more than 50,000 times smaller than the smallest bacteria or virus." 

The penultimate step removes all remaining contaminants through a dual process of the additon of hydrogen peroxide and the use of ultraviolet light. Finally, water goes through granular activated carbon to remove the last of the remaining peroxide. The result - pure, drinkable water from reclaimed water.

Because the process is still being tested and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality won't yet give the greenlight for the system to be used in the public's drinking water, we couldn't get a refreshing drink of this water today. The day will come when all of us can enjoy this sustainable source of water.

Two thoughts: First, I have a love for industrial plants and for all engineering projects. They are beautiful forms of humanity's ability to solve problems scientifically. Unfortunately, some of our processes have wreaked havoc on the planet. Still I have faith in science and technology not only to make all human lives better but to do so in a way which preserves and protects Mother Earth and all of its inhabitants. This marvelous work of water treatment technology is doing just that.

Finally, and quite sadly, it was obvious that not one single member of City Council was there today in spite of the fact that they were invited two weeks ago. The most critical issue facing El Paso is the scarcity of water. It is good to know that El Paso Water Utilities is leading the way to a sustainable future. I'm afraid that the current City Council is tugging in the opposite direction.

Park Ponds Again Cut into Open Space Funds to Preserve the Mountainside

ParkPonds Funded with Open Space Funds

Read it and weep. Or, as one El Paso conservationist put it, "something to make your blood boil."

Open space in El Paso is funded by 10% of your stormwater fee. Precious mountainside land could be preserved with that money as long as it has a stormwater function. That's not hard to imagine as water rushing down the mountainside is stormwater. Increasingly, that money is being depleted by park ponds with "grass-covered athletic fields, a landscaped perimeter, picnic tables, park benches and a tree-lined walking path."

Nothing wrong with those amenities. But the money should come from Parks and Recreation and not open space!

Is this a good time to approach this City Council (or T-Rex) and ask that P&R pay for the amenities and not open space funds. Hell no. The ponds with their greenery are pork to them to offer the folks in their districts.

Is this the way it is done in other cities? Hell no. However, it should make us the envy of Van Horn, the standard Cortney Niland has set for us.

[If you receive elpasonaturally by email, you may not see the embedded document. Please go to www.elpasonaturally.blogspot.com to see it, read it and weep. Your blood will boil.]

Update on Mary Gonzalez and HB 3405

This is a follow-up to last Thursday's post, Rep. Mary Gonzalez and the Right of Capture. "Bloody" Mary Gonzalez killed a Hays County bill (HB 3405) which would have extended that conservation district and prevented Electro Purification from taking water from Hays County in order to sell it elsewhere. In that post I speculated that some larger interests might have been behind Bloody Mary's actions. I mentioned the El Paso Water Utilities. CEO John Balliew sent me this message: 

"To the best of my knowledge, no one from EPWU spoke to Mary Gonzalez or anyone else about the Hays County Bill. It was not even on the list of bills that we were monitoring. We do own land inside and outside other GWCDs and we work within the rules of those districts. In general, the purpose of those districts is to let local considerations prevail. I don't see anything with or without the Hays County bill that would be affecting anything in Hudspeth or El Paso Counties. The aquifer conditions are vastly different.


"As to the other issue in your post about us opposing the creation of a water conservation district - I am not sure what kind of district was being discussed, but if the reference was to a GWCD [Groundwater Conservation District], the simple reason we would not be in favor of one is that there is no need. Those Districts are for situations where you have different types of users and uses of water and you need to have a mechanism to solve disputes and operate the system for the common good. In the case of the Hueco Bolson in Texas, it is just us and Fort Bliss and we have worked very well together to reduce pumping to a sustainable level. I am not sure anything could be gained and there is a potential for some loss of sanity. There is at least one GWCD in the state whose desired future condition for the aquifer is to completely deplete it."

Mr. Balliew answers our questions.

Now, read a comment posted on last Thursday's blog entry:

"As a Hays Countian who has followed this issue closely, I went into Rep. Gonzalez's office to discuss her concerns regarding HB 3405. She avoided my questions and pawned me off on her Legislative Director who she said was very familiar with the issue.

"Rep Gonzalez's legislative director did NOT know what a Groundwater Conservation District is. She also didn't know if the district they serve (El Paso) has a groundwater conservation district or is in one.

"As far as the concerns she's stated in interviews -- they make NO sense.


"Also, someone should ask her HOW this local bill would set a precedence and hurt the rural farmers in her area -- this statement alone shows she DOES NOT understand what this bill does."

So I'm guessing that, if Bloody Mary has no idea what a GWCD is, it means that indeed someone is pulling her strings OR that her submarining HB 3405 was an act of vindictiveness. (That legislator did something to her so she did something to him. I don't know if the record indicates this.)

She's either stupid or lying. A pawn or a vindictive person. Either way she has done great damage to the people of Hays County and her own District. And, if she is acting on the behest of some other entity whether she knows what a GWCD is or not, she is not acting for the people who elected her or the people of Hays County who have already endured so much with the recent catastrophic floods. 

I agree with this letter writer to the El Paso Times as published this morning:

"Rep. Mary Gonzalez of El Paso is using her authority to support a corporation that is trying to steal the water from longtime Hays County residents.

"House Bill 3405 is a local Hays County bill that would close the loophole that Electro-Puro Corporation is trying to use to usurp the water rights of people in Hays County.

"Rep. Gonzalez, whose district is no where near Hays County, personally blocked our bill.

"Giving Electro-Puro our water gives them the right to move it 30 miles away to build subdivisions that are only on paper.

"Why is this woman who claims a degree in social justice choosing to support a corporation that found a loophole in Texas water law? What about the people?"

Rose Penzerro
Driftwood, Texas

Cuellar To Replace Andron at EPWU

Here's some good news - great news really: Real Estate Manager and Counsel for the El Paso Water Utilities, Lupe Cuellar, will replace General Counsel, Robert "Bob" Andron. Mr. Andron officially retires tomorrow, May 29, 2015. Ms. Cuellar takes over as General Counsel on Monday, June 1, 2015. 

Cuellar has been a strong advocate for open space and conservation while remaining fair to other stakeholders. elpasonaturally was happy when she was put in charge of open space acquistions. She proved to be hugely successful with her negotiations for open space purchases. Following the direction of CEO, John Balliew, Ms. Cuellar put together a team and crafted a new and environmentally-sensitive wildlife and vegetation policy for the utility. She has also kept in mind the interests of petitioners and the compromise known as the Northwest Master Plan and elpasonaturally believes that she and Balliew were instrumental in saving that master plan from a potential threat to submarine it.

On the other hand, elpasonaturally has been critical of Mr. Andron particularly regarding an attempt to enforce a gag rule on PSB members following an objection by then PSB member, Rick Bonart, over a donation to the College of Engineering at UTEP. Dr. Richard Schoephoerster is the Dean of that college and the Chairman of the PSB.

Lupe Cuellar has a Master of Arts from Texas Tech University and a JD from the University of Texas at Austin. She was the Assistant City Attorney for the City of El Paso from 1996 until 2012 (over 16 years of service). She then became the Real Estate Manager and Counsel for the EPWU.

Andron is out. Cuellar is in. "God's in his heaven; all's right with the world." Well, at least this corner of that world.

Balliew Explains Current EPWU Media Campaign

[Last Thursday I published a sarcastic post about the current EPWU media campaign, "Water Forever". EPWU's President and CEO, John Balliew, responded with the following explanation:]

"For many years El Paso Water Utilities has talked extensively about the need for a sustainable water supply for the future. Forever is another way, and perhaps a more impactful way, of saying sustainable. Also, for many years we have concentrated on water conservation messaging and people have responded above and beyond our expectations. For this media campaign, we wanted to highlight the connection between the hard work our employees do day in and day out for our customers to be able to use this precious resource."

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.

Stalled!

Stalled!

A simple request by the EPWU to have an easement across an abandoned water drain owned by the El Paso County Water Improvement District has been delayed now for months because the water district board won't act on it. EPWU wants to provide water for the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park from the Bustamante water treatment plant; but the water district has stalled the pipeline project and done so without accountability or transparency. (Read Judy Ackerman's post on the subject HERE.)

The water district had the matter on their October 2014 agenda. It went into executive session and never made it out. The matter was not brought up in November and December. In answers to pleas to allow the easement, District Manager Chuy Reyes only says that he is working on an agreement with John Balliew. It appears that Reyes wants to dictate when and how much water will go to the wetlands as a condition for the agreement. 

It is difficult to understand what goes on behind the closed doors of an executive session especially one so tightly controlled by a clandestine coterie: the water district board. In addition to their lack of public accountablily and transparency is their violation of Texas State Law by failing to post all of their agendas and minutes online. Just take a look at their gaps in posted minutes.

The Board meets the second Wednesday of each month at 8:30 AM in Clint, TX. There next meeting then will be January 14, 2015. The address for the water district office and board meetings is 13247 Alameda Avenue.  It may be a long drive but worthwhile to press the water district board to act on an easement with the EPWU and to do so without any conditions.

TWDB May Do Much Good but Does It Always Tell the Truth?

The Perry appointed Texas Water Development Board may do much good with the dispersal of SWIFT (State Water Implementation Fund for Texas) funds, but does it always tell the truth?

Daniel Borunda reported in a story in today's El Paso Times that TWDB Chariman, Carlos Rubenstein, said at a meeting at El Paso's TecH20 center yesterday that "state funding will pump millions into water projects in the region the chairman of the Texas Water Development Board said Wednesday during a meeting in El Paso."

Borunda also wrote that "John Balliew, the president and chief executive officer for El Paso Water Utilities, said EPWU will seek SWIFT support for an expansion of the Jonathan W. Rogers Water Treatment Plant, an advance purification system to turn waste water into high-quality drinking water and systems to capture "tail water" or unused water."

All of the above is good. Read the Times story. Judy Ackerman emailed me these notes about the high points of yesterday's meeting:

"About 50 attendees including Jesus “Chuy” Reyes, Edward Drusina (IBWC Commissioner), Pat Gordon (Rio Grande Compact Commissioner).

"Senator Rodriguez introduced the only speaker:  Carlos Rubinstein, Chairman of the TX Water Development Board.  

"The main point was how to apply for SWIFT $s, who can and when.

"In his opening remarks, Rubinstein mentioned the Rockefeller Resilience award given to El Paso - kudos.   He said “No issue is more important to TX than water.”  The State Water Implementation Fund for Texas (SWIFT) will “ensure water for 50 years.”

"By legislation, they must use At Least 20% of the funds on Conservation and Reuse (which includes lining of irrigation canals and municipal water line losses).  At Least 10% of funds must go to Rural communities and agriculture.

They are working on the issue of assigning capital costs to conservation.  (what is the dollar value of water lost to seepage in open irrigation ditches, etc.)

"Sierra Club is in the conversation with TWDB on conservation issues.

"Sen Rodriguez’s question:  what about Fracking and water use? 

Answer:  Statewide, fracking uses only 1% of TX water.  Expect frackers to use more brackish water.  Frackers may receive “incentives” to reuse their water.

"TWDB hosts meeting for innovative ideas on water and they are always packed."

The emphasis on fracking is mine. If Rubenstein and the rest of the TWDB believe that fracking only uses 1% of Texas water, he and they are either not telling the truth or they are misinformed, deceived or having pipe dreams. Because of the incestuous relationship that Texas Republican government has with big oil, I unfortunately believe that they are not telling the truth and are attempting to deceive us.

Read my two posts about the math of fracking water consumption HERE and HERE. 

Coincidentally to yesterday's TWDB meeting, Governor Cuomo of New York announced that his state was banning fracking because of health and environmental concerns. Also yesterday, Politico ran this report about the Texas energy revolt especially in Denton, Texas which banned fracking in a vote last November. 

I'm sure that Senator Rodriguez's question to Rubenstein was inspired by elpasonaturally's exposure of plans by Torchlight Energy Resources to frack on the Diablo Plateau (part of the same ecosystem as the Otero Mesa) mere miles beyond Hueco Tanks and the city limits of El Paso.

Keep in mind that El Paso Water Utilities may sooner than later be importing water from that plateau in Hudspeth County. We have to ask how Torchlight or any other fracker will pollute that groundwater. The TPWD should be asking the same question and, rather than enabling the fracking industries destruction of the scarce commodity of water, it should be fighting it. Unfortunately, big oil elects governors of Texas along with Railroad Commissioners, Land Commissioners and governors appoint the TWDB members.

Be sure to read a November press release by TWDB announcing the adoption of the final rules for the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas (SWIFT). Be sure to click on the links on the bottom of the release and read the information.

BTW a group of El Pasoans involved in the Texas Water Captains initiative met on Wednesday at the Columban Mission Center.

The Gloves Are Off

City Council's land grab is becoming more and more obvious. It entails destroying your Public Service Board, the very people who have made sure that all of us who live in this desert city even in the midst of drought have water. Why the land grab? So that they can sell off land in little bits at a time to the sprawlers who are funding their campaign coffers and pulling their strings. What we have now is no longer a representation of us, but an autocracy of a very few people with the greedy intent of getting richer and richer. Damn our children and grandchildren and their children. Let them thirst, they say. Their profit now is all that matters.

Let me give you four examples of the land grab. Pay attention El Paso Times, El Paso Inc., El Paso Diario, KVIA, KTSM, et. al. especially to this first one:

First, Council's most egregious and covert attempt occurred at last Tuesday's City Council meeting. There was a strategic effort made by Rep. Cortney Niland to put control of all PSB managed land under the control of City Council by amending the language in a bond issuance proposed by the PSB. PSB bonds are backed by the assets of the utility pledged as collateral. In the bond language the PSB is referred to as the "system". Niland wants the land NOT to be part of the system but under the control of City Council. The problem with that is the fact that bondholders could then sue the city because there would no longer be collateral backing the bonds. The solution proposed was to alter the language in the bond issuance to prevent bondholders from having grounds to sue. 

24 hours before Council Sylvia Firth, who works directly under the Mayor, announced this new language. In executive session, the Bond Counsel, Paul Braden convinced City Council that it was impossible to make this change with only 24 hours notice. The language was dropped and the usual language remained. HOWEVER, we can expect Niland, et. al. to be better prepared in 6 or 8 months when more bond issuances go to Council.

Know that Niland has been heard in public that she does not care about EPWU's prestige for being one of the best water utilities in the country, she wants the utility to be under the direct control of Council so that our land can be sold for revenue. Her shortsighted plan is completely contrary to the vision for having an independent PSB/EPWU in the first place - a vision that has led successfully to our having water and water at a very low rate. (Those rates will still be lower than the average rates across the country even if it should go up another 8 percent or so. And remember, businesses, that it was Council not the PSB who levied that exorbitant franchise tax - I mean "fee" - on you and not the PSB.)

Second, Council's most egregious and overt action to destroy the PSB and grab land for their sprawler masters occurred just two hours ago. They appointed the third-rated candidate (Bradley Roe) over the first-rated and current PSB member, David Nemir. Why? Refuse the Juice said it the best in a post just minutes after the vote: "[Roe is] clearly a pick that will vote to sell all of the PSB land to home builders in tiny parcels so that parks don't have to be included . . . among other amenities. Smart code is out the door with this guy."

"The fix was in" as Refuse the Juice explained. As soon as the candidates were introduced, Lilly Limon moved to accept Roe. She did her part. It was all orchestrated beforehand. Only Rep. Robinson and Rep. Ordaz voted against the motion for Roe.

Thirdly, last March 18th City Council seemed poised to jettison smart development from the Northwest Master Plan - a plan forged by the efforts of so many El Pasoans. Their efforts were thwarted by an outcry by many of us and they reaffirmed (at least for now) that Master Plan. It bears vigilant watching however.

And finally, the recent attempt to take money from that portion of the stormwater fee dedicated to buying and preserving natural open space for flood control projects was a means of undermining not just the PSB but the Open Space Advisory Board. As an OSAB member I took the position that we could afford to be part of the City's efforts to help flood control. I was wrong. Many of you told me before that I was wrong and now you hear me saying it. It was an attempt to undermine the PSB by taking that decision away from them. It was an attempt to undermine the Open Space Advisory Board by setting the precedent that open space money is merely a slush fund. Hopefully the matter is dead as I posted last week. I can tell you that, when several of us were first invited by the Mayor to his office to discuss his proposal, I asked whether he had spoken to John Balliew about the proposal. Surprisingly he hadn't and he seemed to be caught off guard by my question. He promised to do so but I bet he wouldn't have had I never asked the question. I'll use another post to relate how we were sold a car. For now, know that I will ask that the matter be put back on the OSAB agenda so that we can rescind our recommendation.

I like to get along and always give the other side the benefit of the doubt and believe that win-win solutions are always best. I believe that there is good in each and every person. However, the beliefs, habits and practices of the El Paso autocracy (and the fact that they are an autocracy) - the sprawlers and their Council lackeys (who I will stop referring to as "representatives" because they don't represent the people) - are shortsighted and simply bad for our future. I will for awhile be posting daily about this land grab and the machinations of the autocracy. I can't be nice any longer. 

The gloves are off. It's time to fight back. El Pasoans are about to step up. Save our water. Save our land. Save our PSB.

One More Reason to Support Our Public Service Board/El Paso Water Utilities

John Balliew receivng the AMWA Sustainable Water Utility Management Award.

The Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, an organization of the largest publicly-owned drinking water suppliers in the United States, honored our El Paso Water Utilities (EPWU) with its Sustainable Water Utility Management Award. This is one more reason to keep the PSB/EPWU independent and not make it just one more department of the City of El Paso. 

By the way, be sure to read the October 20, 2014 post at Refuse the Juice. Quoting directly and emphasizing:

"The PSB is one of the few things in El Paso - government wise - that works."

And again:  

"Should El Paso be taking steps to protect it's most precious asset (water) and the preserver of that asset (PSB/EPWU)?"  

Here's the EPWU press release about the award:

El Paso Water Utilities Receives National Award
for Sustainable Water Management

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. – The Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA) honored El Paso Water Utilities with The Sustainable Water Utility Management Award at its 2014 Executive Management Conference on Monday in Newport Beach, Calif.

 

The Sustainable Water Utility Management Award, presented for the first time this year, recognizes water utilities that have made a commitment to management that achieves a balance of innovative and successful efforts in areas of economic, social and environmental endeavors.

 

“AMWA awards recognize the serious commitment and significant progress these award-winning drinking water agencies are making toward long-term viability through innovative management practices, executive leadership and employee engagement,” said AMWA President Chuck M. Murray, General Manager of Fairfax Water. “Sustainable communities cannot exist without sustainable water systems, and these award winners are invaluable assets to their communities and their customers.”

 

El Paso Water Utilities, one of nine utilities to receive the national award, was recognized for its proactive water management strategy focused on policy, planning and technology. Sustainability for EPWU means protecting public health by producing clean, safe water from renewable resources while meeting daily standards.

 

“Our unique geographical location and climate requires us to be proactive,” states John Balliew, EPWU President/CEO. “We work hand-in-hand with our customers and stakeholders to aggressively implement our water resources management plan.”

 

EPWU was commended on receiving high marks in all areas, according to national benchmarking surveys conducted by AMWA. AMWA also took special note that El Paso’s average residential water bills are among the lowest in the Southwest, largely due to gains in operational efficiency and a commitment to continuous process improvement principles.

Tempest in a Teapot

Want to brew a tempest in a teapot? Here's how:

Item 12d on yesterday's agenda of the El Paso County Water Improvement District #1 Board meeting was:

Application 1683, by El Paso Water Utilities-Public Service Board, for a 25 year license to construct a 36-inch reclaimed water main crossing the Rio Intercepting Drainage Canal at approximately Station 39+65.

The “36-inch reclaimed water main” is the planned pipeline from the Bustamante Plant to Rio Bosque and, in time, to a regulating pond as part of the utility's conservation strategy. 

At Water District Engineer Al Blair’s request, the item was moved to “closed session.”  After 2 hours of closed session, which also included many other items on the agenda, the board reconvened in open session, and Board President Johnny Stubbs stated the board was taking “no action” on Application 1683.

Naturally the lack of action raised fears among conservationists and friends of the Bosque and seemed to dampen the jubilation expressed in the recent Rio Bosque News. Here's your tempest in a teapot brewing.

Even though the EPWU will seek clarification, one wonders if it really matters what the District does that can hold up construction. Whoever can't read maps that show rightaway or whichever maps are incorrect, construction will go on even if EPWU will have to zig and zag a bit. Of course in November, the Water District Board may just grant the license.

Of course, elpasonaturally will keep an eye on this. However, for the time being, a deep breath might be helpful. Balliew and crew are trustworthy.

The matter though raises another issue that I have been planning to blog about for awhile now: the greed of those who serve on the Water Improvement District Board and hence their unwillingness to care anything about anyone but themselves. 

Picture this: you own a large pecan farm in the lower valley. You also have sat for decades on the Water District Board. Your Daddy served on it before you. Your Board is unanswerable to anyone else and YOU set the price you will pay for water for your water-guzzling pecan trees. That indeed is how it works.

Wouldn't it be nice for any one of us to sit on a board that sets the price we pay at gasoline pumps or at the grocery store? We set prices low for us but high for everyone else.

Here's what Water District Board President Johnny Stubbs pays for his water:

The EPWU buys water for as much as $260 an acre foot! It's less on different contracts but not nearly what Johnny and the boys pay - the price set by themselves for themselves. Again, nobody oversees the district board - at least nobody who gives a hoot and a holler.

Rather than being civic-minded and, in truth, patriotic, members of the Water District Board will clench their fists in an executive session (which may not have been legal) and make no decision on a request that helps neighbors and could encourage an $18 million dollar per year eco-tourist site at the Rio Bosque. But, of course, that $18 million dollars won't go into their pockets. 

Ensuring a Sustainable Water Supply

Here is the slide show used at last Friday's PSB/EPWU Strategic Planning Session.

PSB/EPWU Strategic Planning Slide Show

Just a few quick observations:

The PSB/EPWU is the only El Paso "institution" that intimately understands conservation. The entire plan is concerned with the technology, policy and, yes, conservation necessary to make sure that El Paso has water. The PSB was created in 1951 during what was a bad drought. Our drought today is worse.

Attempts led by the clandestine and powerful Builders Association and City Council members who are in debt to the Builders to make the PSB/EPWU a city department are just wrong. In their minds it's a matter of revenue and the protection of the builders from paying impact fees and the rejection of the visionary Plan El Paso, the most hated document by the Builders Association. Conservation is the last thing on their minds. Build, build, build. Sprawl, sprawl, sprawl. Guzzle, guzzle, guzzle - no water in short time. Thank you, PSB, for being conservation oriented. Of course, EPWU's product to sell is water. If they limit the amount, they bring in less revenue. Thank heavens for innovators such as John Balliew, who know that other products must come off the line as well. They are working on it.

They conserve better than conservationists. For years we have been hounding and howling to bring more water to the Rio Bosque. They have a plan that not only does that but recaptures more water for the City!

Finally, we see a strategy for capturing more rainwater which includes the regulating pond that will benefit the Rio Bosque.

Here's the dark cloud: Council recently imposed a fee for street repairs and has the EPWU collect that fee through our water bills. The fee goes to the City. Council could have just accepted the counter-proposal for a larger EPWU budget to do the same job. However, the current Council had ulterior motives: enact the fee and, in time, raise it. More especially, Council wanted to get its hands into the governance best done by the PSB. The first major problem with the fee is that it makes it harder for the PSB to raise rates that will go to critical infrastructure needed now or soon. The second major problem is that the fee does not encourage conservation of our scarcest and most precious resource: water.

Somebody Kill this Vampire Once and for All Times

It's become almost an annual or semi-annual event: an attempt to dissolve the Public Service Board and put control of the water and stormwater utilities directly under City Council control as a department of the City of El Paso. Like the living dead rising from the grave for fresh blood, this attempt has been coming up periodically. 

The most recent sighting of the Vampire came in this message from Rep. Emma Acosta's office:

"Representative Emma Acosta, District 3 authorizes the placement of the following item on the Regular Agenda for the Tuesday, September 9, 2014 City Council meeting:


"Discussion and action to review, amend, or dissolve the City of El Paso ordinance that created the Public Service Board, charged with the management and control of the water, sewer, and drainage systems of the City. To analyze, recommend, and determine the most desirable and best interest of the citizens and rate payers of the City of El Paso, in any changes, amendments, or repeal of the ordinance."

I spoke with John Balliew this morning. Although the motion has been withdrawn, there is every reason to be wary that it will re-appear sooner rather than later because the Vampire has recently drawn new blood in the form of a repugnant, unfair franchise fee which forces EPWU to collect money from non-residential customers in El Paso (read mostly Mom and Pop businesses that are already struggling in El Paso's economy.) PSB did not authorize the fee - Council did. So, as Emma must want to push the point, who needs the PSB?

Several points and please remember them:

We need the PSB as the very best way to preserve our most precious asset: water.

Take over the PSB and start selling the land to the sprawlers (what useful idiots for the sprawlers such as Emma really want) and we will soon collapse our water supply.

Balliew offered a better idea: let the EPWU assume pavement costs when mains break. Invest in newer infrastructure. Council rejected this idea because they really don't want the fee to cover an expense item in the budget - they want it as an ongoing way to raise revenue. 

This Council is NOT business-friendly. They are sprawler-friendly, Schwartz-friendly, Rubin-friendly but NOT business-friendly. They continue to plunder the wealth of businesses and homeowners to pay for the increasing costs brought on all of us because of unchecked building sprawl. Counting city taxes and the franchise fee almost 20% of the water bill paid by one of El Paso's oldest businesses and major employers goes to the City! 20 percent!  Rather than build the wage and salary base of the City in order to enlarge the amount that sales tax pays for city services rather than property taxes, Council raises your property taxes, forces your business to pay yet another fee, and allows the sprawlers to laugh and sing all the way to the bank. BTW, I believe that, in time, it will be obvious that Tommy Gonzalez is the pick of the back-room boys who like sprawl. (It wasn't unanimous you know to choose him and the Mayor really did break a tie. Happy now, former Mayor Wardy? Doug? Jerry?)

So, don't think that the Vampire has gone away. It may take an amendment to the City Charter to drive the wooden stake through its evil heart.

How to Help Save Cement Lake

Last Thursday I posted that TxDOT recently purchased land that includes the natural lake and wildlife habitat known as (Portland) Cement Lake. The Lake was one of the top priorities for acquisition in the City's Open Space Master Plan. In the end, TxDOT's dollars were more attractive to Cemex.

The good news in all of this is that Bob Bielek, TxDOT's Regional Engineer, has let it be known that TxDOT would like to Master Plan the area which includes the lake and work with the City and PSB. He has made it clear that all he needs is an official letter from the City or PSB (or a Councilwoman perhaps?) in order to get the ball rolling on master planning.

Here's how youcan help now:

As a wildlife expert, open space advocate, conservationist, outdoor enthusiast or someone like me who just cares: please urge city officials to work with TxDOT and involve the conservation/wildlife/open space community at all stages of the discussion and in all phases of the planning. 

Cement Lake should not be destroyed and it should not become a public, recreational park. It should be preserved as an unusual ecosystem and habitat - a place to visit, view and study - and treasure.

Please urge the Mayor and others to work with TxDOT to preserve the lake as a wildlife habitat and a place for visiting and viewing.

I have discovered that the best way to contact Mayor Leeser is to email his Assistant, Taylor Moreno at MorenoTL@elpasotexas.gov. Mr. Balliew's email is better known: jeballiew@epwu.org. Rep. Niland's is nilandcc@elpasotexas.gov. (Cement Lake is in her district. I spoke to her briefly and she is interested.) 

Please keep your messages positive. There is no itch at this point to scratch. Please make your title or position known whether it is Urban Biologist, Curator, former Curator, Secretary of FMWC, President of Audubon, OSAB member, Outdoor Enthusiast, Birder, Concerned Citizen - whatever. 

Please share this post with others and forward to your groups, friends, colleagues, etc.. This is a wildlife issue not a political one.  Let's be heard now and get the ball rolling and make sure that those of us who know about development, wetlands, wildlife, open space, conservation or those who simply love our outdoors are very much involved. Cement Lake is an El Paso Regional treasure. 

Let's save Cement Lake!

Pipeline to Bosque Schedule

Why it takes longer for public entities to get from A to Z is a mystery to me. Perhaps someone knows. Many have anxiously awaited for a long time to see the schedule for a pipeline from the Bustamante to Rio Bosque Wetlands Park. EPWU CEO John Balliew has been pushing on and for this for a long time. Thank you, Mr. Balliew! Here it is:

Do click on the image to enlarge and give 3 cheers.

What's Next with the NW Master Plan

After a discussion in City Council last week I voiced the concern that the NW Master Plan could be in danger of becoming a conventional development and its arroyos just a memory once the bulldozers started up. I wondered whether Council was ready to jettison their agreement with the 2011 petitioners, the PSB, city staff and many others who worked for about a year to forge the Plan as part of a win-win solution.

This past Sunday, the El Paso Times published a story about the same concern by investigative reporter, Cindy Ramirez. 

Mayor Leeser invited me to a meeting at his office yesterday. Also in attendance were John Balliew, Lupe Cuellar, Kristen Hamilton and Taylor Moreno. The Mayor said that he had no intention of changing the plan. His main concern was to sell some land. He stated and Balliew confirmed that Balliew had said that the Plan must not be violated. I told the group that I was delighted but that it would be good for the City Council to follow the Mayor's lead and reaffirm the NW Plan and its use of smartcode.

A number of us had met at my home on Sunday evening and agreed that I should ask Council to place on its agenda an item reaffirming the NW Plan and its use of smart code. In addition, we agreed that Council should show good faith by placing PSB Open Space in the NW Master Plan under a conservation easement.

With a large group behind me, I made these requests at Council this morning. Rep. Ann Morgan Lilly said that she would place our requests on the City Council agenda.

Here is the text of my words to Council this morning:

I was the author of and principal organizer for the 2011 initiative petition to save 900 acres of natural open space associated with the Transmountain scenic corridor.

We successfully gathered the necessary signatures from over 1600 people. 

Rather than voting on the petition wording, City Council members, along with petitioners, agreed on a process which culminated in a new NW Master Plan. During that process a vote on the petition was routinely postponed and then finally deleted when we agreed on the compromise. 

Approximately a year of work went into forging a deal. Dover Kohl conducted well-attended workshops, charrettes, and meetings with the community, the PSB, City Planning, Engineering, Parks and Recreation and other staff.

This plan, which cost $600,000, included smart code, state-of-the-art Green Infrastructure/Low Impact Development techniques for stormwater conveyance, and infrastructure designed to maximize arroyo preservation, open space, and the scenic corridor.  The PSB approved the plan and City Council adopted the NW Master Plan.  It was an example of a true collaborative ‎effort. 

The NW Master plan was and is an expression of the will of the people as was Plan El Paso that took two years and 2 million dollars and the input of thousands of El Pasoans.

 

‎I was shocked and dismayed when I watched this City Council at its March 17th meeting take action seemingly to begin to dismantle the agreement by removing smart code as well as  other agreed upon development  restrictions, and explore the sale of the land in small parcels for conventional style development.   Along with many others I noted with dismay that there are similar intentions with the NE Master Plan including Painted Dunes. There seems to be a material breach of all of our prior agreements and promises. 

If carried forward, action that would in effect scuttle the NW Master Plan would overturn the real, democratic, grassroots decision-making we did with Plan El Paso, the 2011 Transmountain petition and the NW Master Plan. 

 

I want to thank the Mayor who has given me his personal assurances that no changes to the NW Master Plan will be made. I ask for the same assurance from City Council. It would go a long way toward restoring trust and good will if City Council will put on its agenda an action item reaffirming the NW Master Plan. We would like the City Council to affirm the following at next week’s meeting:

1. First, that you are still committed to the NW master plan as adopted, and

2. Second, that you support the current smart code zoning and will not try to remove it, and finally

3. That as a sign of that reaffirmation, you direct staff to place a conservation easement over all of the Public Utility Open Space in the NW Master Plan.  

Without assurances, we may have no other choice except to get more signatures for a ballot referendum and/or pursue other legal means.

Sprawlers' Agenda Revealed

Sprawl results in blight such as this in Central El Paso and burdensome property taxes but not prosperity.

City Council voted unanimously today to postpone raising impact fees for a year. Their vote followed a revelation by the Mayor that he had spoken with the CEO of the EPWU, John Balliew, and builders. Balliew apparently indicated in private conversations what he stated today: the EPWU's budget is set for the year and funding for the water plants would not be necessary for a year. Balliew also stated that there would not be a rate increase as the result of postponing the impact fees. There was some discussion at Council that perhaps the recent passage of Proposition 6 in the State of Texas might mean some money for water infrastructure here in El Paso.

Certainly I appreciate the Mayor's efforts behind the scenes so to speak. On the other hand, he (and El Paso) would benefit more from the expertise from City Planning. The introduction of the ordinance should have come from Planning Director, Matthew McElroy. Instead, the Mayor interrupted Mr. McElroy and had Mr. Balliew come to the podium in order to circumvent (and I'm not using this word pejoratively) the original proposal to raise the fees and, instead, to explore postponing the fees.

Dr. Noe stated that he understood that impact fees is a matter of fairness: you use something, you pay for it; you don't, you don't. However, he also stated that to have infill there had to be incentives. When I addressed Council I agreed with him about incentivizing infill projects. What concerns me is that by  "incentives" he and others mean doing away with Smart Growth and shelving Plan El Paso - the very Master Plan that sprawlers hate. (I would look for incentives in terms of reducing permit fees and hook-up fees from EPWU.) In fact, as I expressed to Council, I hope that, during this coming year, that the City will pay for an independent study to verify whether we have grown and can continue to grow ourselves to prosperity. Study after study across the nation shows that sprawling does not pay for itself but rather is a drag on the economy of a municipality. In the case of El Paso, sprawl puts the burden on the property owner with burdensome property taxes - especially the low to middle/low income families who are in a majority in El Paso. It wouldn't hurt for the City to find out for sure about growth, sprawl and prosperity.

By the 1950's El Paso was the leading city in the southwest. It occupied just 25 square miles of land - a modest growth from its beginnings with 8 square miles. With the advent of the automobile, the freeway, and the suburban model of development, El Paso today occupies 260 square miles and is one of the poorest cities in the country. Certainly, it is not the leader in the southwest or Texas. Sprawl has not brought prosperity. It has brought burdensome property taxes and increasing blight.

The agenda of the sprawlers became obvious today. They loathe impact fees and hope that a State proposition will soothe the unfairness of putting the burden on ratepayers. They want no impact fees. Moreover, they want to abolish Smart Growth and they want to rezone the Northwest and Northeast master plans so that there are no smart growth requirements. Unfortunately they own this current City Council and may succeed with their agenda.

I do hope that a study about sprawl and prosperity can be conducted during this coming year. The downside to my proposal is that the Council can always cherry pick a consultant who will tell them what they want to hear - sprawl makes us more prosperous; build, build, build to your greedy heart's content, Mr. Sprawler. The builders control CIAC which will continue to advise against impact fees. Surprise. Surprise.

One hopes that the Mayor will listen to good scientific data about sustainable growth. There are very knowledgeable people here in El Paso who can help him: people from Eco El Paso, people already in city government in Planning and Sustainability. They need a place at the table as well. My guess is that, just like the stakeholder meetings that were held for selecting a new City Manager, there will be no one with environmental engineering and planning expertise and what gets done will be mere window dressing. The real decisions will be behind closed doors - Mayor with John Balliew and with builders and the chit chat of Representatives outside of City Council.

It's not good.

Lingering Doubts about EPWU and Rio Bosque Are Much Ado about Nothing

Just in the past week I have written two posts about the great news coming out of the El Paso Water Utilities regarding the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park. You can read those posts HERE and HERE. A new authorization for reclaimed water is found in the first of those two links or you can go HERE. 

In spite of the good news and the new authorization, some in the environmental community have continued to have doubts and suspicions. What everyone needs to know is that the new authorization supersedes "all of the above".

Better than my explaining, here is how EPWU CEO John Balliew answered the questions in separate email messages that I have combined together. I have also clarified when necessary by using []:

"Many have seen the proposed TCEQ language [in the current and previous authorizations] and are questioning whether or not it gives EPWU authorization to discharge effluent to the Rio Bosque. As a point of clarification, 'effluent' becomes 'reclaimed water' when it is beneficially used. So, any time you take effluent and put it to a beneficial use rather than to a disposal situation, it becomes reclaimed water. So, the use dictates the distinction[my emphasis]. When we take effluent and put it onto Rio Bosque it becomes reclaimed water.

"Once you are talking reclaimed water, which we are, then you next talk about quality. Reclaimed water can be Type I or Type II depending on quality measurements. Type I is the higher quality designation. There are three measures: Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Turbidity and Fecal Coliforms. Type II has only two measures: Biochemical Oxygen Demand and Fecal Coliforms. There are numerical standards for these parameters. We feel the effluent from the Bustamante plan would meet Type I requirements most of the time. However, we only need Type II for this purpose.

"A question has arisen about the term 'rapid infiltration' [my emphasis] and that is something different from what we have talked about in terms of Rio Bosque and effluent. We did not request authorization to do rapid infiltration because that has some specific connotations and it is likely approval of that use designation would require soil modification to the Bosque and further treatment at the Bustamante plant. I do not think any of us had in mind that kind of drastic changes to the Bosque nor were we thinking costly treatment. Based on the quantities of surface water applied to the Bosque by the District, we know that application of reclaimed water to the Bosque is going to result in recharge.

"The term 'Rapid Infiltration Basins' in TCEQ lingo is something very specific and refers to a method of effluent disposal. Rapid infiltration basins are typically artificial creations. We have several in the NE part of town. Our primary purpose with the Bosque is to supply water to the wetlands. Secondarily, we recognize that some water will infiltrate. We know from the water that EPCWID#1 has provided in the past that the amount of that recharge is significant. But, we are not going to alter the Bosque to accomplish more recharge than would naturally occur. So, we did not apply for a rapid infiltration permit because that is not our intent."

The new authorization again supersedes previous documents. It is a blanket authorization which includes the Bosque or any other wetland for that matter. As the semantics shift with the new authorization, a permit for a third, fourth, fifth . . . tenth turnout is not needed. It is authorized. Period. No further authorizations, MOA's, whatever are required. 

As I reported in my last post on this issue, Balliew stated and he stated again to me today in a telephone conversation: the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park will have 3 sources of water including the turnout which is ipso facto authorized.

Here's what I wrote which was almost verbatim from Balliew:

"Bottom line: the Rio Bosque will have 3 sources not just 2 for water: directly from the Bustamante, from the turnout at the Riverside Canal as it currently gets from the WID#1, and now water from the ponds owed to EPWU by the WID#1."

All of the above is not just good news but great news. If some find it necessary to continue to look for cabals and hidden agendas, I am powerless over them and their distrust. The sky is blue. There is no attempt to make it just seem so. It does not help our cause for the environment and conservation to see things in every instance as dirty dealing - to see things broken and demand that those things be fixed by the very system one can't trust. (Never mind taking personal responsibility with lifestyle choices.) I'll agree that institutions have inertia and much too often people seek and hold power to control policy for special interests and reap personal benefit. But keep this in mind: CEO Balliew is the same guy who instituted a policy to save wildlife habitat and has already put it in action at the Charl Ann Pond, a natural bird preserve. When habitat was being destroyed this past summer in the Upper Valley, Balliew responded by bringing together wildlife experts and ecologists with an EPWU attorney and an environmentalist along with crew members. They crafted good wildlife and conservation policy. I do not recall many in the environmental community speaking out. In fact, I remember lots of Chamberlain whispers and inaction. The proof is in the pudding. Balliew is making lots of pudding.

Rio Bosque News Is Better than Imagined

I had the opportunity to speak in person with Mr. John Balliew, the CEO of the El Paso Water Utilities this morning. The topic of conversation was the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park. Our visit followed my Monday blog post More Good News for the Rio Bosque. The post raised some anxieties among members of the conservation community. 

To help visualize what I'm going to say, take a look at the map below. You will definitely want to enlarge it (maybe in a different tab) and refer back to it:

Rio Bosque Wetlands Aerial Map 

The map shows the relationship among the Bustamante Treatment Plant on the right, the Rio Bosque in the center and the Socorro Ponds/Reservoir on the left. The Socorro Reservoir is the project that Mr. Chuy Reyes and his engineer both from the El Paso County Water Improvement District #1 proposed to the PSB this past Wednesday. They have worked out an arrangement with the EPWU for ponding areas to reserve water for El Paso County farmers. Currently, stormwater moves down the river past our County and to the Hudspeth County reservoirs. Because of the arrangement, the WID#1 will be able to capture that water for our farmers and owe water back to the EPWU. (The EPWU owns the land where the ponds will be.) The water owed back to the EPWU will be used to help irrigate the Rio Bosque.

The red line on the bottom of the map indicates where a pipeline will go from the Bustamante to the Socorro Ponds. It is the extension of that pipeline that has delayed going to bid since the pipeline will also be part of the relationship among the ponds, the Bosque and the Bustamante.

Bottom line: the Rio Bosque will have 3 sources not just 2 for water: directly from the Bustamante, from the turnout at the Riverside Canal as it currently gets from the WID#1, and now water from the ponds owed to EPWU by the WID#1.

One big concern that some had as the result of Monday's post was the TCEQ authorization. The new authorization (now being finalized) mentions nothing about "effluent" only Type I and Type II reclaimed water. Balliew explained that "effluent" often is Type II reclaimed water as its turbidity and bacterial counts are low enough to be re-categorized. In other words, what may be called effluent, is most often Type II water that the TCEQ will permit to go to the Bosque. Note again that the new authorization allows for water from the Bustamante to be used for the irrigation of "constructed wetlands".

But the news just gets better. The EPWU has already begun working with the Army Corps of Engineers to produce a wetland park at the Rio Bosque much like the Rio Grande Valley State Park in Albuquerque. (You can still see online an initial presentation of this Corps of Engineers project from 2010 complete with a virtual tour.) Add to this vision of the Bosque another one: the EPWU is acquiring other drains so that one day you may indeed enjoy walking along a parkway from Ascarate to the Bosque.

A final P.S. about an EPWU project I get super-excited about: Our utility has become quite successful conserving water; and let us hope that they conserve much more and that the City will indeed move toward some enlightened rainwater strategies that will help even more and perhaps to codifying truly water savings building practices.  A downside of that success though is the fact that they are selling less of their product thus making staying in business, so to speak, more difficult. Mr. Balliew has proposed new products: producing phosphorous and nitrogen for commercial use. Currently EP farmers purchase millions of dollars of fertilizer. Also currently, most of the nitrogen and phosphorous available from water treatment is lost. Capture it. Sell it. Voilá! New products. Balliew and company are working on it. Now, if only the TCEQ (and EPA) would allow the use of the effluent "cake", rather than being forced to bury that product that also contains needed soil micronutrients, local growing industries could benefit. I say this as one who has asked for years now why we don't sell Zoo Doo as they do in Seattle for example.

Again, the news at and for the Rio Bosque just gets better and better.