The Lost Pines GCD Board of Directors will consider and possibly take action on a Settlement Agreement with Forestar (USA) Real Estate Group, Inc. at its meeting this Wednesday, December 9, at 6:00 p.m. at Bastrop City Hall. The public will not be allowed to make oral comments at the meeting.   Public comments may be submitted in person at the District's office or by email to comment@lostpineswater.org before 5:00 pm on Monday, December 7, 2015. (see agenda).    

 

According to documents provided on the Lost Pines GCD website, the settlement would grant Forestar a permit that can ramp-up to 28,500 ac-ft/year over a six year period (Special Conditions 3-5 of Operating Permit). A complex set of calculations, based on monitoring well data and estimated yearly desired future conditions (DFC) will be used to determine whether or not Forestar is allowed to increase pumping from an initial 12,000 ac-ft/yr, to 20,000 ac-ft/yr after three years, and to 28,500 ac-ft/yr after another three year period. A Transport Permit would allow export of groundwater outside the District for as much as thirty (30) years (Terms of Transport Permit). The term of the Operating Permit is five (5) years and is subject to Special Condition (8) whereby Forestar must have a binding contract(s) to provide 12,000 ac-ft/yr to End Users within five (5) years from issuance of the Permit. Place of use must be in Bastrop, Hays, Lee, Travis and Williamson counties (see Operating Permit).

 

Forestar will install six new monitoring wells as a condition of the settlement as detailed in the Monitoring Well Agreement. These wells, as part of the District's Monitoring Well System, will be used in making calculated estimates on which the decisions regarding increased pumping will be made. Notably, as currently drafted, Forestar will also have veto power, without reason or opportunity for mediation, that would prohibit the District from adding specific monitoring wells to which Forestar objects (other new monitoring wells) to the District's Monitoring Well System at any time in the future (Article 1, Section 2 of the Monitoring Agreement). Environmental Stewardship is very concerned that this provision of the Monitoring Agreement would influence the data used to make decisions on increased pumping, like gerrymandering is used to influence votes. ES is working to have dispute resolution and other clarifications added to Section 2.

 

The District's approach to managing large volume applications is a notable departure from past practices and has considerable merit.  ES applauds the District for its forward thinking and courageous approach to resolving the difficult issues it faces.  However, as argued in our comments on the  End Op settlement agreement -- which seems to be the template for the Forestar settlement -- ES is concerned that the calculations and the methods used to make the necessary determinations have not been adequately tested to ensure that they are reliable for use in making such important decisions.   As such, ES will request that the District conduct, if they have not already done so, such simulations as would be required to test the calculations and decision process to ensure that the calculations and the use of the model are adequately accurate to make a determination to allow increased pumping some 40+ years prior to the 2070 target date for the desired future conditions.

ES will also request that a presentation on the simulations be provided to the Board in public session with unfettered public participation.   Simply said, since the model being used was not created for this purpose and the accuracy of the model in predicting future drawdowns is unknown, the District needs to demonstrate to the public and elected officials that it has done its due diligence in developing these calculations and decision conditions BEFORE the settlement agreement is brought to the Board for a vote.

 

Unfortunately, as with the End Op Board Meeting, the public is not being allowed to make comments in a public forum with the Board members present.   As such, there are no assurances that written comments to the Board will be read and understood, much less considered by the Board prior to voting, which could occur as early as the December 9 special meeting. ES is very concerned that the public's interests are being ignored or limited, while only the behind-closed-door demands and negotiations of Forestar are being considered. ES, along with other interest groups, will be calling for a more open and transparent process. We will urge the District to extend the time period for public comments so that adequate analysis of the settlement agreement can be made and reported for the Board's consideration. The public and local elected officials should have adequate opportunity to understand and comment on the settlement since it has such important impacts on our communities. Certainly the Board should have adequate time, after comments are received, to hear and consider the public's concerns.