SATURDAY NIGHT AT THE WESTERNER

Why isn’t anyone discussing Senate Bill 3?

By Pat Carlson

When I read that Senate Bill 3 was the “beginning of the implementation phase of the state’s 50-year water plan,” I immediately took notice. I probably won’t be around 50 years from now but my children and grandchildren and by then, great-grandchildren will be and I want to know what they can expect. The author of the bill, Senator Armbrister went on to say, “the importance of healthy bay systems in Texas is critical to the environment and to the state’s economic growth. A healthy Texas coast has a multibillion-dollar impact on our economy.” SB 3 may be good for the waterways of Texas but what about the citizens of Texas?

I admit I am not an expert on water management but I am a voter, a property owner, and a consumer of water and SB 3 raised red flags in my mind in all of these areas. It creates two new bureaucracies while at the same time giving additional authority to three existing bureaucracies – the Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept. (TPWD), the Texas Water Department Board (TWDB), and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). The bill deals with equity by creating a new tax on those who use the largest amounts of water. The environmental language in the bill will bring a smile to the faces of radical tree huggers like the Sierra Club and at the same time make property rights advocates bolt their doors and dust off their firearms.

NEW BUREAUCRACIES

SB3 creates a new bureaucracy with four tiers called the Environmental Flows Commission. This commission will have 9 appointed members - 3 state senators, 3 state representatives, and 3 members appointed by the governor from the TWDB, TPWD, and TCEQ. The commission “may adopt rules, procedures, and policies….. to ensure the ecological soundness of….. systems and adopt appropriate methods by which…….existing water rights may be converted temporarily or permanently for environment flow protection.”

The second tier of the bureaucracy will have 5 to 9 members appointed by the Flows Commission and called the Texas Environmental Flows Science Advisory Committee (TEFSAC). The TEFSAC “shall appoint a basin and bay area stakeholders committee” which in turn “shall establish a basin and bay expert science team.” The expert science team has to make recommendations for a “flow regime” and “environmental flow standards” for the stakeholders committee to submit to the commission but delivered by the TEFSAC. The TEFSAC will have as much or as little power as the Flows Commission deems it. The TEFSAC is basically the “go-to guy” carrying the water (no pun intended) for the commission.

The problem with this whole bureaucratic structure is the lack of accountability to area voters. Only the Flows Commission has elected officials serving and only two thirds at that. Also, creating bureaucracies gives opportunity for every special interest radical group to be appointed. It is all about who knows whom and who has given the most money to whom. The proposed statute states, “the flows commission may accept gifts and grants from any source.” It will be a breeding ground for conflicts of interest and corruption.

Additionally, the stakeholder committees are mandated to “operate on a consensus basis.” Operating on a consensus basis means a facilitator will have a pre-determined result the committee must be convinced they have collectively formed. What is wrong with the individual vote with the majority deciding the outcome?

Groundwater Conservation Districts (GCD) that have elected boards now exist in 50% of the state managing about 80% of the state’s groundwater, but the SB 3 would create a new Groundwater Management Area Council. The presiding officer of the GCD’s or that person’s designee would serve on the council and report to the Texas Water Department Board. The council will setup monitoring networks and adopt a statement that describes the desired future condition of each aquifer in the management area. Again, accountability is being taken away from area voters. Why do we need bureaucrats managing an elected body?

The bill would restrict operation of high-capacity wells outside the boundaries of a water conservation district, effectively changing the rule of capture, the basis for Texas water law for the past century. It would also require a license for the export of water from such high-capacity wells to other parts of the state.

ENVIRONMENT AND PRIVATE PROPERTY

The authors of the bill claim that the human factor has been included by stating flows may be temporarily suspended “to meet essential human needs during emergencies.” The next question is who will determine what is an “essential human need?” This may satisfy the necessities for human needs but what about ownership of private property? The bill also states “it is the public policy of the state to provide for the conservation and development of the state’s natural resources, including the stewardship of public and private land to benefit waters of the state.”

In case you are wondering, the bill defines land stewardship as “the practice of managing land to conserve or enhance suitable landscapes and the ecosystem values of the land.” Most people are not sure what an ecosystem is much less what values are affixed to it.

Believe it or not, there is a set of “intrinsic ecosystem values.” The term “active-use value” applies to goods and services used in some activity like recreational fishing, skiing, or camping. The “existence values” are things people appreciate without actually using them or even intending to use them (like a distant wilderness or an endangered plant or animal.) “Bequest values” are things people want to remain available for others (such as their descendents) to use and appreciate. Also, the definition of an ecosystem is “a dynamic complex of plant, animal, fungal, and micro-organism communities and their associated non-living environment interacting as a functional unit.”

Does the Texas legislature really believe that Texas property owners want their rights decided based on an abstract fluffy set of values that only a microscopic organism could appreciate? I don’t think so.

There is a new paradigm taking place in SB 3 when legislation is written based on a condition that is applied to the environment but one which truly only applies to living breathing creatures and that is biological health. The bill says that a “strong public policy imperative …exists recognizing that environmental flows are important to the biological health of public and private lands, streams and rivers, and bay and estuary systems…” D. J. Rapport in Ecosystem Health states “……an ecosystem health focus sets the stage for a new environmental ethic…” To most proponents of ecosystem health, the alluring feature of the human health metaphor is that people have an inherent understanding of personal health. Most people envision instinctively a “healthy” ecosystem as being pristine or at least appearing to be minimally altered by human action. Thus, the general public, policy officials, and scientists intuitively grasp ecosystem health.

Someone, usually a bureaucrat, must decide based on their own set of values and preferences what ecosystem condition or function is good. Ecosystems have no preference about their states, so preferred states or benchmarks must come from the individuals doing the evaluation. Because “health” conveys a positive political connotation, the common practice in policy debates is to capture the high ground by labeling your policy choices as being necessary for health and those of your opponents as leading to sickness or ecosystem degradation. Laws should never be written or passed based on these false assumptions.

EQUITY

SB 3 establishes a new tax for Texans who use the most water. The tax is called the Water Conservation and Development Fee. Any resident of a single-family home that uses more than 5,000 gallons of water a month will be taxed three cents on every additional 1,000 gallons. This new tax will go in the state coffers in an account called the Water Infrastructure Fund and one of the many things that this new money will be used for is statewide assistance to economically distressed areas for water supply and sewer projects. This is also known as redistribution of wealth or equity or our government at work taking from the rich to give to the poor.

EDUCATION

SB3 will establish a public awareness program encouraging Texans to conserve their use of water. This program is estimated to cost $135,000 a year for additional staff for the TWDB and contractor services estimates for the purchase of media advertising and the development of materials range from $9.9 million in fiscal year 2006 to $58 million in fiscal year 2010.

The comptroller’s office projects that if SB 3 is implemented the state will net $43,000,000 in 2006 to $39,000,000 in 2010. These projections are based on the income of a new tax revenue.

CONCLUSION

It is my opinion that if SB3 is passed into law in its present form, Texas will not be a better place for future generations. Property rights will be taken over by the state for the health of the environment and voters will be disenfranchised and powerless to hold anyone accountable. Also, if Texas lawmakers continue to pass their elected relegated duties to bureaucrats their very existence will be irrelevant. They will serve in title only.

Whether or not there is a need for Texas waterways to be increasingly managed by the state remains to be seen. But if this is the case, let’s manage our water through elected bodies with laws written in a language everyone understands.

Pat Carlson is Chairman of the Tarrance Co. Republican Party and can be reached at PCarlsonTCGOP@aol.com

© Pat Carlson 2005


The curse of the gal-leg spurs

By Julie Carter

It was August in DeLeon, Texas. The annual Peach and Melon Festival Parade was about to begin.

Following the usual train of thought for the state of the union mentioned, this was the best darn parade to precede the best darn peach and melon festival in the best darn part of central Texas.

Garland and his brother Jerry were sitting on their horses watching the parade and waiting for their turn to get in line at the end. The cowboys had come to town to be in a parade. No one ever really knew why.

Jerry was riding his good roping horse and Garland was on a fairly green colt. For you pilgrims, green wasn’t his color but his level of experience.

Garland owned a pair of gal-leg spurs he was right proud of and wanted to wear in honor of the occasion. Gal-leg spurs are called such because the shank on the spur, the part that sticks out from the boot to hold the rowel, is shaped and engraved to mimic a saloon girl’s leg. The design dates back to early spur makers in the late l800’s.

While Garland’s spurs had never been on a boot prior to parade day and they wouldn’t stay in place, he wanted to share this piece of history with the pilgrims of DeLeon. Occasionally he’d have to reach down and put his spurs back into proper position on his boot heel.

The parade was pretty long and the colt Garland was riding got progressively more nervous. Once in a while Garland would walk him off and then ride him back to the waiting spot, trying to settle him down.

After a time of watching the parade, the colt’s nerves were knotted up tight. Garland reached down to adjust his gal-leg spur and the colt came completely untrained. He crow hopped (an unserious form of bucking) around in a circle.

Ever vigilant, Jerry reached over as the colt bucked by him and grabbed the cheek strap of the colt’s bridle. Garland had landed somewhere behind the colt, somewhat ironed out on the pavement.

A lady from the crowd, not realizing Jerry had the colt caught, came running toward him in an attempt to help. As she got closer and closer, the colt started backing up without actually moving his feet. The colt knew Garland was behind him so his attempt to avoid the lady turned into a stretched out squat.

Finally, as the lady got right up close, the colt just sat right down on Garland’s chest.

Nearby paramedics were there in a flash and began an immediate assessment of the situation. They asked Garland if he had any pain.

A strained reply from Garland was, “You darn right and I know exactly what this horse weighs. Get him off me!”

The area was cleared and medics ascertained that Garland had a slow heart rate. A lady opened his shirt and started rubbing him down with ice.

The paramedics told Garland that this was a public function and by law he was required to go to the hospital as a precautionary measure. The seven block ride to the hospital would cost $580.

Jerry asked Garland if he was okay and Garland said he was although he knew he’d be a little sore tomorrow.

“Well then,” said Jerry. “Get the heck up and let’s go home.”

They were not invited back the next year to ride in the DeLeon Peach and Melon Festival parade.

Julie can be reached for comment at jcarter@tularosa.net

© Julie Carter 2005

I welcome submissions for this feature of The Westerner

===