WWN Rockport, Texas

Comments | Fb:
0 Letter to the Editor | "Re: The Groundwater Conservation District Proposition Election Results" | by Diane Davis

5/11/16

To Whom It May Concern:

From my perspective, the election for the Aransas County Groundwater Conservation District was soundly defeated for a number of reasons. I have listed a few here:

1. The prospect of new taxes complete with a new taxing district will seldom be well received by the majority of voters. This one was made even more unappealing as citizens were asked to vote on something many people knew little or nothing about and it was to be governed by individuals chosen or ”appointed” with no information offered about them except their names.

2. A lack of confidence in our local government was substantiated by the minimal effort made to notify every single property owner in Aransas County of this critical election. This proposition had been one of Aransas County's "best kept secret" until about 3 weeks ago. Thank goodness for social media and local community newsletters.

3. Citizens were asked to vote into place a governing body which had a “plan” that was not going to be shared or finalized until after the election. That makes no sense on any level.

4. A preliminary budget to include sources of revenue and expenses was not offered for consideration or review. All that was mentioned was that taxes would be levied. The estimated $315,000 potential tax income from Aransas County property owners would not even begin to cover all the expenses the District had already indicated they would require: 5 board members, 3 admin/staff, office space, office supplies, vehicle(s), insurance, “as needed” attorneys, bookkeeping, engineers, drilling test wells, etc. Now, just where do YOU think these additional funds were going to come from to cover all this?

5. At meetings and in FAQ’s, it was stated this new District would protect the county’s groundwater from “big business”; but, in their own review of the Downsides of the their plan, it was admitted that a well owner could export all he wanted and he would just be subjected to financial fees or penalties. To me, that’s not protection.

I do understand there are two sides to this topic and I am glad there are those planning ahead that want to protect our resources for now and 50 years from now. But, the method by which this was presented did nothing but create a great deal of suspicion and doubt on what the true focus of this District might be.

Will local government listen to what the majority of voters have said? I’m not sure. They have until 2019 before they have to request for this legislation again. We will just have to watch and see.


Diane Davis


Opinion pieces/submitted articles and comments are the thoughts of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the WWN.


See all the posts related to this issue

No comments:



Join Us on Facebook! Click here



Follow Us on Twitter! Click here

Follow the WWN on Twitter


Scroll to Top