Login Profile Get News Updates PDF of Print Edition
Flip Edition
2010-03-16 digital edition
General Worship Health Automotive Business Directory Classifieds
Poll
News
Front Page
News
Obituaries
Church & Community
Columns
Sports
Farm and Ranch News
Photo Gallery
Services
Contact Us
Advertiser Index
Front Page March 16, 2010  RSS feed

Oakwood Council has questions for Ground Water District Manager

By Melissa Missildine

Councilman David Neel listens intently as David Bailey, our area’s General Manager of the Mid-East Texas Ground Water Conservation District, tries to explain why he wants the city to pay a 4-year-old past-due bill. Photo by Melissa Missildine Councilman David Neel listens intently as David Bailey, our area’s General Manager of the Mid-East Texas Ground Water Conservation District, tries to explain why he wants the city to pay a 4-year-old past-due bill. Photo by Melissa Missildine David Bailey, General Manager of the Mid-East Texas Ground Water Conservation District, attended the March meeting to address a billing issue with the members of the Oakwood City Council. According to the records of the District, Oakwood had failed to pay three years of regulatory fees. The Council had many questions for Bailey.

The first question they had was, what is the Mid- East Texas Ground Water Conservation District?! Bailey explained that they were a regulatory program started in 2001 designed to ensure "desired future conditions" of the aquifers in the state of Texas. He went on to explain that they help to regulate area wells to make sure that everyone has their equal share of ground water without going over a set limit that would either infringe on someone's water rights or endanger the future of ground water in a given area. Well use is registered and monitored at the state level by breaking it up into districts. Any well that produces over 50,000 gallons of water per year, must obtain a permit to do so. The fees attached to that permit vary but are a maximum of 17 cents per acre foot. Currently that fee is 4 cents per acre foot. Anyone abusing their permit guidelines, is subject to a $10,000 a day fine and/or can be shut down. For some undetermined reason, the district received all of the appropriate reports but the City of Oakwood did not pay the fees for 2004, 2005, or 2006.

Next, Councilman Barry Olive asked, "Why did you wait so long to tell us we didn't pay this bill?" Bailey just recently came onto staff and it was after he came on that the discrepancy was discovered. The Council members were adamant that if they had received a bill, they felt sure they would have paid it. It is their policy to pay bills immediately unless there is a specific concern that needs to be addressed. No one could remember ever receiving a billing statement from the District until the ones they paid for 2007 and 2008. After further discussion, it was brought to light that Oakwood is not the only city that missed these payments. The City of Streetman had missed four payments during the exact same time. Bailey admitted that it could be a simple clerical error but that it was irrelevant; that he was there to set up a payment arrangement as he did with the City of Streetman. The Council voted to have City Secretary Shannon Nicholson research the financial records to make sure these fees had not already been paid. According to Olive, "If we paid it and the check was cashed, you're just going to have to lump it." Mayor Vicki Stroud added, "If we do owe it, we'll just pay it." The council saw no need to pay it out. The missing payments total $2785. Bailey also informed the council that all agricultural, industrial, and public water works permits for Oakwood had expired and need to be renewed.

Other matters discussed at the meeting included the "official" election date approval for May 8, 2010 to run in conjunction with the school board elections, although it may be a mute point since no one signed up to run against the current Council members. Water Supervisor Tommy Reese gave a report on the continued efforts to obtain a smoke test for the water lines. This test will check for leaks and water pressure problems throughout the system. The matter was table until Reese could seek out bids from companies who do this test. The council will then weigh the cost of purchasing equipment to do the testing themselves versus hiring a company to perform the task.


Readers Comments

Just wanted to make a few
Submitted by David Bailey (not verified) on Wed, 03/31/2010 - 21:09.
Just wanted to make a few clarifications about this article to your readers. First, a well that has the capacity to produce over 50,000 gallons per day is subject to permitting, not 50,000 gallons per year. Also, the current fee that is charged for the production of non-exempt wells is currently 4 cents per 1,000 gallons produced, rather than 4 cents per acre foot. I apologize for any confusion with regards to my statements but I feel it is important to insure that the facts are correct.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.