Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Tainted Chicago Water

Courthouse News Service

Trey Wilson Texas Water Lawyer - Trey Wilson Texas Water Rights Attorney -Trey Wilson San Antonio wrote:  This story is from Courthouse News Service

CHICAGO - Chicago has been contaminating its drinking water with lead for years as it tried to fix its aging lead pipes, and it knew it, residents claim in a class action that may have more victims than the fiasco in Flint, Mich.

The three named plaintiffs claim that Chicago's attempts to patch its aging water distribution leached lead into the water supply from the corroding pipes.

  

Chicago has more lead pipe water lines than any other U.S. city - nearly 80 percent of Chicago properties receive their drinking water from lead pipes, according to lead plaintiff Tatjana Blotkevic's lawsuit in Cook County Chancery Court.

Read the full story HERE 

Crystal City Water Woes Make National News

Black water pouring out of Texas town's faucets

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/02/21/black-water-pouring-out-texas-towns-faucets.html

Town of Bartlett, Texas Without Water After Pumps Fail

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:    From KSAT 12:

Failed pumps leave small Texas town without water

BARTLETT, Texas - The mayor of a small Central Texas town says the city will be without water for up to three days after two water pumps failed.

The Temple Daily Telegram reports that Bartlett Mayor Norris Ivy made the announcement Wednesday. Meanwhile, Bell County Commissioners Court Judge Jon Burrows declared the town of 2,000 people located about 50 miles northeast of Austin to be in a local state of emergency.

Both the main pump for the ground storage tank and the city's backup water well failed.

The city was making available bottled water and non-potable water available.

Read the story HERE

Federal Control of Water Rights May be Closer Than You Think

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:   From TheBlaze:

Obama’s Forthcoming Executive Action Could Impact Your Property

The Obama administration is expected to announce final details of “Waters of the United States” rule this week that could impact any property owner with water or a ditch that occasionally fills with water on their land. Moreover, the regulation could even conflict with two Supreme Court rulings.

The Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers have sought to provide more clarity to what bodies of water are protected under the 1972 Clean Water Act, which has previously affected rivers, lakes and the streams that flow directly to them.

Private property advocates, such as ranchers and farmers, fear the new rule could encompass nearly any type of water on a property.

“Property owners will not be able to engage in activities they should be able to engage in,” Daren Bakst, a research fellow in agriculture policy at the conservative Heritage Foundation, told TheBlaze. “This will be devastating to private property rights. It’s an attack on private property rights. Most people don’t have the money to pay for all these permits.”

he EPA referred TheBlaze to a blog written by EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy and Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Jo-Ellen Darcy.

“Protection for about 60 percent of the nation’s streams and millions of acres of wetlands has been confusing and complex as the result of Supreme Court decisions in 2001 and 2006,” they wrote.

The post continued, “We’re limiting protection to ditches that function like tributaries and can carry pollution downstream—like those constructed out of streams. Our proposal talked about upland ditches, and we got feedback that the word “upland” was confusing, so we’ll approach ditches from another angle.”

Twice in less than a decade the Supreme Court, first in the 2001 case of Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and again in the 2006 case of Rapanos v. United States, struck down efforts by the two agencies to expand jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.

The two agencies say the rule will accommodate the high court rulings, while critics say it clearly expands beyond the court’s limits on the government.

“It’s not uncommon for an agency to broadly interpret language, but based on court precedent, it is going way too far in exceeding what it is allowed to do,” Bakst said.

The proposed rule would regulate “tributaries,” or depressions in land that can fill up with water. Currently such water cannot be regulated, but the EPA contends that such bodies of water – even if temporary – can run off and send pollution into larger bodies of water.

The American Farm Bureau Foundation established a special website called “Ditch the Rule,” using the term “ditch” for claiming the EPA wants to regulate a ditch under the Clean Water Act.

The EPA conducted an aggressive social media and public relations campaign, which critics have said skewed public support.

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

California Court Ruling Threatens Price-Driven Conservation Efforts

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

With the hot summer months quickly approaching, many in San Antonio are bracing for what has become almost as much of a rite of summer as a Spurs Playoff run – mandatory water restrictions.  While not quite as depressing as seeing a veteran opponent drain that miracle shot to end our season, watching thirsty landscapes wither under the Texas sun is pretty grim.  But, we are San Antonians not alone.

Scarcity of water has become a global issue that frequently makes headlines. Crises created by water shortages impact nearly every aspect of human life in the developed world:  the 2016 Olympic games in Rio de Janeiro, daily life in Sao Paulo, American Heartland crop yields, Taiwanese factories, development within the San Antonio-Austin corridor, and the very existence of Medina Lake are all facing serious and immediate threats posed by water scarcity.  There are innumerable other examples, not to mention water-related poverty and illness in the “developing world.”

One very effective tool employed by water providers in combating such shortages is the promotion of conservation. In essence, conservation – by reducing or eliminating waste - increases water availability without physically supplementing supply. That is, conservation encourages the “highest and best use” of water by stimulating responsible consumption and discouraging excessive, inefficient and/or irresponsible use.

Conservation programs have many components, including education, management practices, auditing and reporting, etc. But, an unfortunate reality is that many consumers (of all things and not just water) take notice only when you “hit ‘em in the pocketbook.” Thus, tiered “conservation rates” where customers who consume larger quantities of water are charged higher per-unit costs than those with less consumption are typical components of water conservation plans across the country, including in Texas.

One California lawsuit threatens to upend this practice, and the trial court has struck a significant blow to water utilities’ ability to use financial policies to reduce consumption and promote conservation.

In August 2012, an association of taxpayers and residents filed suit against the City of San Juan Capistrano, California seeking to prohibit that City from charging water rates that exceeded the City’s actual costs of providing water to its customers. In particular, the Plaintiffs sought (among other relief) to set-aside a tiered water rate structure that the City had employed since 1991 in an effort to promote conservation.

The Orange County Superior Court ruled against theCity, and ordered it  to abandon its rate structure and base all water rates on the cost of providing service.  The City has appealed, and the appellate court’s ruling is due any day now.  If the trial court’s opinion is upheld, the ability of California water utilities to promote conservation through the prices they charge will be significantly impacted.

Notably, the California case turns on interpretation of a state-specific proposition. However, the decision in that suit could create a nationwide ripple effect as water utility customers and their lawyers evaluate legal vulnerabilities of other conservation plans where pricing is used to advance conservation.

Brain-Eating Amoeba Found in Louisiana Water Supply

Brain-Eating Amoeba Found in Louisiana Water Supply

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

From KSAT.com:Defenders Test: River cleaner with treatment plant

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

According to a report by the KSAT Defenders,  a water treatment plant recently constructed near the San Antonio zoo have really cleaned up water in the San Antonio River near the zoo. The Riverwalk is a different story though...

As San Antonio grows, so do water committee woes - WOAI News 4 San Antonio - Trouble Shooters

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote: This is a great story about the "powers that be" concerning San Antonio's  water supply.

By STACEY CAMERON News 4 San Antonio 

As San Antonio grows, so do water committee woes - WOAI News 4 San Antonio - Trouble Shooters

San Antonio is booming. While growth is great, all the new construction comes with a price. Someone has to pay for infrastructure like water lines, and it's up to city council to decide who should pay the fees. While they have the final say, the council is first advised by a committee of experts. These same experts often finance their campaigns. News 4 San Antonio Trouble Shooter Stacey Cameron examines this sphere of influence that cannot only control how you use your water, but what you pay. 

In many cases, City Council will pass fees to help offset the costs of some projects.  But as it turns out these fees can also impact how much you pay for water. And even though the Council has the final say on how much these fees cost, they are often first advised by a committee of experts. One such committee is the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee or CIAC for short.  

CIAC is an 11 member panel that in part advises City Hall on the best way to supply the city with water. "We really do our best to appoint people to the board that are qualified and interested in serving in that role," said Councilwoman Shirley Gonzales. Like every member of City Council plus the Mayor, Gonzales appoints one person to serve on CIAC and she recently put her person in place. "He's a small business owner," said Gonzales. "He has a small engineering architecture firm in district five." But that appointment is far from unique, and in fact it's a problem.  That is because City Code says only five CIAC appointees should hold jobs in real estate, development or building trades and the remainder should represent the community as a whole.  That balance ensures that developers do not get off easy while water customers pay higher rates. 

But as it turns out Amy Hardbeger is the only member of CIAC not working in one of those industries.  Hardberger is a geoscientist, turned water conservation attorney who now teaches law at St. Mary's University School of Law.  She thinks water is the biggest issue for the nation's seventh largest city. "Where we get our water, how we pay for that water and who pays for that water has to be one of the most important conversations we need to be having," said Hardberger. About a year ago Hardberger landed a spot on CIAC when former Mayor Julian Castro appointed her to the post.  

Speaking of the work CIAC does and how it has the potential to affect water rates in San Antonio, Hardberger says the committee should have greater representation outside the real estate, development and building industries. "It is really talking about who is going to pay for new supply and that conversation needs to be shared," says Hardberger. So why isn't CIAC a more diverse body?  Well money maybe the answer.  That is because campaign finance records show real estate and development interests flood council elections with cash. 

But Councilman Ron Nirenberg says that tide of campaign contributions isn't buying influence at city hall.  "I think they're always be, speculation of course," said Nirenberg. "But the proof is in the pudding with regard to how we vote." To make his case, Councilman Nirenberg points to the recent debate over impact fees. In short, impact fees are a one-time charge developers pay to hook up to public water.  When it came time to raise that fee this spring every member of the developer-heavy CIAC, save Amy Hardberger, advised City Hall to keep the fee low. 

But City Council ignored CIAC and passed a huge hike to impact fees developers will soon pay. "We have to make sure we have independent voices on council. That we aren't beholden to a particular perspective other than the best interests of the city." Does that mean the real estate, development and building community is losing influence on CIAC?  Probably not, because like Gonzalez, Nirenberg is set to make an appointment to the committee and he does not seem prepared to deviate from the course set out by his predecessors on Council. "I will be looking for someone who has a variety and broad perspective within the real estate community but also understands water in general," said Nirenberg. 

Three other Council Districts also have open CIAC appointments to fill.  One is actually District Two, new San Antonio Mayor Ivy Taylor's former district.  When reached by News4 last week, then Councilwoman Taylor said she was too busy to speak. Councilman Ray Saldana of District Four and Councilman Chris Medina of District Seven also have open spots on the committee, however neither council member returned messages asking for comment.

Read More at: http://www.news4sanantonio.com/news/features/trouble-shooters/stories/as-san-antonio-grows-so-do-water-committee-woes-359.shtml?wap=0&

'Water Cops' Deployed in Drought-Stricken California Cities

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

This story, while sad, is not surprising. Earlier this year I had occasion to travel to Sausalito, California, I observed signs in many restaurants stating that they were using paper plates and only serving water upon request because of the water shortage.  Population explosion and drought are a dangerous combination. New water alternatives must be planned for now!

Drought-stricken California towns hiring 'water cops'

Towns cracking down on reckless water use

City of San Antonio to Propose a Change in Stormwater Fees

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

From the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce:

The Chamber’s Board was briefed on the possibility for changes in residential and commercial storm water fees that will be presented later this summer to the City Council for discussion and approval as a part of the city’s budget. The fees could potentially impact businesses in several ways.

The stormwater fee is billed by SAWS on behalf of the City of San Antonio's stormwater utility to support and manage the operation and maintenance of the stormwater infrastructure, as well as for engineering, design, and capital improvements.

San Antonio's stormwater fees are used to solve drainage problems and improve surface water quality, to prevent future problems, and to repair, maintain, and enhance the stormwater infrastructure.

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/3335982237001/031314water255/

Texas to proceed with water lawsuit against NM

From the Las Cruces Sun News
By: Susan Montoya Bryan

ALBUQUERQUE >> The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that Texas can proceed with its lawsuit against New Mexico over management of the Rio Grande.

Texas contends that groundwater pumping near the Texas-New Mexico border has resulted in Texas farmers and residents being deprived of Rio Grande water.

The dispute's complex history focuses especially upon farmers in the Elephant Butte Irrigation District, which delivers river water in Doña Ana County and southern Sierra County. Many growers have been anxiously wondering whether the high court would give a green light to the case.

There's a lot of uncertainty about the direction the case could go and about the ultimate result, said Gary Esslinger, manager of the 8,500-member irrigation district.

"I really don't know what the outcome will be," he said. "It's really unfortunate we're in this predicament. We'll just have to see."

Thorny debate

New Mexico argues that downstream users are getting what's required under a compact between the states and that the Supreme Court should have let lower courts consider the dispute.

New Mexico Attorney General Gary King said Monday he was not surprised by the court's ruling.

"I am confident that the court takes such state-to-state disputes very seriously, and we look forward to being able to tell New Mexico's side of the story and to have our day in court," King said.

The Supreme Court gave New Mexico 60 days to file a motion seeking the case's dismissal. Texas would then have an opportunity to respond.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality first asked the Supreme Court to weigh in more than a year ago, alleging that New Mexico was violating the 1938 Rio Grande Compact that governs how water is shared by Texas, New Mexico and Colorado.

EBID officials have said the Supreme Court dispute puts the irrigation district in awkward position. That's because, for groundwater purposes, EBID is squarely under New Mexico authority. But for river water regulation, it's lumped in with Texas under the Rio Grande Compact.

It's that arrangement, Esslinger said, that may prompt EBID to try to intervene in the new Supreme Court case as a third party, independent from New Mexico or Texas.

"We'll not necessarily be taking New Mexico's side or taking Texas' side," he said.

EBID officials have blamed the Texas action in the Supreme Court on a separate federal lawsuit brought by King, who challenged a 2008 water-sharing agreement between EBID and its irrigation district counterpart in El Paso County.

EBID officials have said they don't believe Texas would have filed the action, if King hadn't filed his.

Esslinger said he believes EBID is well-positioned to argue its case to the Supreme Court because the 2008 agreement has guaranteed that farmers in Texas are getting their share of river water.

"We think that it's working," he said. "We're going to continue to stand behind that position."

King argued that the agreement unfavorably changed the allocation of water for his state.

EBID officials have said the agreement was aimed at heading off a legal battle between the two states that could ultimately harm Doña Ana County farmers by cutting off their right to use groundwater.

Drought persists

Nearly all of New Mexico has been mired in drought for the past several years, leaving stretches of the Rio Grande dry at times and reservoirs along the river at record-low levels. Without any promise for moisture this winter, farmers are still making hard choices about whether to grow staple crops such as chile, onions and pecans.

Those farmers who made it through last year had access to wells for irrigating because there was not enough Rio Grande water left for New Mexico. This year, irrigation officials have yet to make predictions about how much water might be allocated.

Sun-News reporter Diana Alba Soular contributed to this report. 

EDITORIAL: Protecting Valley water -- groundwater conservation district might be wise - The Monitor: Editorials

EDITORIAL: Protecting Valley water -- groundwater conservation district might be wise - The Monitor: Editorials   



Editorial by State Rep. Eddie Lucio III     

Posted: Monday, January 20, 2014 12:03 am

With the scarcity of water a threat to South Texas’ future, the Rio Grande Regional Water Authority’s board is wise to take a cautious yet proactive approach in researching ways that the region could establish a regional groundwater conservation district to regulate water flow from our area.

At a Jan. 8 meeting in Weslaco of the water authority’s board, McAllen Mayor Jim Darling, who is board president, raised legitimate questions about whether our region is doing enough to protect groundwater beneath our soil. And while many questions are still unanswered regarding the right of capture for groundwater in Texas — and several conflicting court cases — this is a precious resource we should do everything to guard.

“We’re the most under-represented area without groundwater districts,” Darling said. “It kind of concerns me that we’re not controlling our own destiny.”

It’s a valid concern. Because as surface water sources diminish in our state due to expanding population and agricultural needs, more entities are looking at groundwater extraction to fulfill demand. We need to protect our groundwater from being sucked up and sent elsewhere.

State Rep. Eddie Lucio III, a lawyer who is on legal retainer for the board, explained the process for forming a conservation district. This includes: legislature; a petition by landowners of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ); and TCEQ has the authority to create a district, although Lucio said that is in extreme cases and has never been done.

He did caution that there are conflicting legal rulings on groundwater cases and it’s well expected that the next Legislature will take up this issue, which could likely change existing rules.

He told the board conservation districts manage the conservation, preservation and protection of groundwater; manage recharge and prevent waste.

“What you want to do is to know who’s pumping, what they are using it for and where they are sending it, so we have an understanding a great snapshot of our groundwater usage,” Lucio said.

In 2011, the Legislature decided owners “have a right to the groundwater beneath your property; but it is subject to reasonable management by a groundwater district,” Lucio said. “Meaning in proportion to the land you own, you will get so much water.”

What is uncertain is how much these districts can regulate water flow with regard to enforcement and how that might change in upcoming years.

State Sen. Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa, a Democrat who represents the Valley, last week was named to the Joint Interim Committee to Study Water Desalination and sits on the Senate Natural Resources Committee. Water, he told us, is an issue that will be front and center next session.

Hinojosa filed legislation on behalf of Brooks County, which formed a groundwater conservation district that extends into the northern fringe of Hidalgo County. “Many areas of the state have created groundwater districts to be able to regulate the flow of groundwater for farming and agriculture and other uses,” he told a member of The Monitor’s editorial board. “My opinion is we need it. Because underground water is very much a part of meeting the water needs of our growing state and that is part of meeting the needs of our growing economy.”

Forming a conservation district involves administration costs, a representative from Brooks County testified to the Rio Grande Regional Water Authority. It also is subject to regulations as stipulated in the legislation, such as whether conservation board members are elected or appointed. And enforcement is a problem for that county, he said.

There certainly is a lot to consider but our area is wise to begin studying this now to protect this precious resource in the future.

Everything's Bigger in Texas, but a $67,000 Water Bill?

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

Tom Hoffman of Dallas, Texas received a second incorrect water bill over $66,000.    The second erroneous--and enormous--bill of $67,000 came a few months after the first one.

Mr. Hoffman had cancelled his auto-draft payment system after the first one hit his account for more than $66,000.  That bill froze his accounts until the error was finally fixed after some time.

City officials report that the erroneous bills were due to a broken water meter and computer issues.

The City of Dallas spokesman, Frank Librio, stated that the meter has finally been replaced  and an accurate bill will follow.  Mr. Librio also apologized for the error and the inconvenience.

San Antonio Greater Chamber Water Committee Pushes for State Help with Endangered Species Process

With the recent discovery of a rare spider that was thought to be extinct, San Antonio commuters in the northwest part of the city saw a halt in the construction of the highway underpass project on Texas 151 at Loop 1604 in order to preserve the spider’s habitat. The Chamber’s Water Committee will take the issue to legislators in Austin to argue for a resolution to the ongoing problem of the state’s inadequate process for dealing with endangered species.

As a result of the find, the Texas Department of Transportation (TX DOT) suspended all permits to construct and build in the area due to the discovery, causing a financial burden on contractors, the city, and San Antonio Water System (SAWS). When construction was suspended, SAWS was only 200 feet from completion in a water main project.

Greg Flores, Vice President of Public Affairs at SAWS, briefed members of the Water Committee and indicated that in order to complete the project, SAWS must either obtain an Incidental Take Permit or wait for a Regional Incidental Permit, which is already underway by Bexar County and the City of San Antonio. However, these options could take up to two years if expedited. SAWS is currently evaluating these options and studying the impact the finding of the spider may have on other projects.

Committee members discussed the importance of expediting the process of obtaining an incidental take permit in such instances as the delay in construction projects. The establishment of a state process for endangered species was also mentioned as a topic to push at the state level.

The Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce - News

Texas Water Lawyer & Texas Water Rights Attorney Trey Wilson wrote:

Trey Wilson has moved his law practice to 111 W. Olmos Dr., San Antonio, Texas 78212. Phone, fax and email will remain the same.

Stop by and say hello!

Liquid Assets: Groundwater in Texas -- Great Article from The Yale Law Journal Online

The following is a link to an excellent article by Professor Gerald Torres, who holds the Bryant Smith Chair in Law at the University of Texas at Austin. While I don;t necessarily agree with the undercurrent that more governmental regulation is the answer to Texas' groundwater problem, the Professor makes fantastic points, and the article is well-written and insightful.

The Yale Law Journal Online - Liquid Assets: Groundwater in Texas

Happy New Year!

The newly-minted 2013 promises to be an exciting year for water in Texas. San Antonio enters the year in Stage 2 conservation/watering restrictions, the drought lingers, and the Legislature is gearing-up for an active session for water-related legislation.

I expect the new year to include profound governmental, public and media attention on Texas' looming water shortage and our need to engage in strategic planning and creative funding for new water supplies.

I hope those who visit this Blog have a blessed, healthy and prosperous 2013.

In Texas, Turning to Outsiders to Finance Water Deals — Water Supply | The Texas Tribune

The construction costs for proposed Lake Columbia in east Texas are projected at $330 million. Under a new and revolutionary public-private partnership, these costs -- and the water from the reservoir -- would be shared between public water agencies and a private infrastructure company. 

Advocates say that private sector involvement is the only way to meet Texas’ growing water needs, but critics worry about how accountable private firms will be to the public, and about the possibility of higher water rates.

In Texas, Turning to Outsiders to Finance Water Deals — Water Supply | The Texas Tribune