Suzanne Schwartz: I think we're going to start. Temple is just going to kind of take a quick note of
Suzanne Schwartz: Who all is is here today, just so we you know we're sure we're not missing anybody who may be out there and not appearing on the screen, they can let us know.
Temple McKinnon: I'm seeing Steve Walthour Region A. Russell Schreiber Region B. Kevin ward Region C.
Jim Thompson: .
Temple McKinnon: Jim Thompson Region D.
Temple McKinnon: Not seeing
Temple McKinnon: Region E.
Temple McKinnon: Allison Strube Region F.
Suzanne Scott: .
Temple McKinnon: Gail Peek Region G.
Temple McKinnon: Mark Evans Region I.
Temple McKinnon: Not seeing Kelley Holcomb. David Wheelock Region K.
Temple McKinnon: Not seeing Suzanne Scott.
Suzanne Scott: I'm here.
Temple McKinnon: Okay, great. So Suzanne Scott's
Suzanne Scott: I just can't get on the zoom link for some reason. And I don't know why that's not working for me, but I'm trying.
Temple McKinnon: Okay.
Temple McKinnon: So we've got you by the phone.
Temple McKinnon: That's great. Tomas Rodriguez Region M.
Temple McKinnon: Region N. Melanie Barnes Region O.
Temple McKinnon: Patrick Brzozowski Region P.
Suzanne Schwartz: Alright. Wow, thanks everybody for being here. That's great, a great
Kelley Holcomb: Suzanne, can you see me? Temple, I'm here, I can see all y'all.
Temple McKinnon: Oh, Kelley there you are. Now I do. Morning
Mark Evans: Morning Kelley. Kelley Holcomb:How are y'all?
Temple McKinnon: So one more is Scott Reinert on the line, Region E?
Temple McKinnon: Okay.
Suzanne Schwartz: We'll get we'll get started. I think, first Director Paup you want to say give greetings to everybody. I thank you for joining.
Brooke Paup: Oh, absolutely. Can y'all hear me.
Temple McKinnon: Sure. Yep.
Brooke Paup: Okay, sorry. The we had a work session last week where we were all muted, half the time. And it was very, very frustrating to everyone. So it's modern day
Brooke Paup: Quarantine issues. But, and again, please excuse my dogs and kids they run into that the room. It's the wild west at the Paup house right now.
Brooke Paup: Thank you all for letting me join you this Council has some really lofty goals and I know we've got 16 of the best and the brightest on it.
Brooke Paup: And I know you have jobs and kids and pandemics to deal with. So I really thank you all for agreeing to serve. I know you've got a big agenda. So I just wanted to pop in and listen in, and just extend my gratitude for all the work that y'all are about to do.
Brooke Paup: That's all I got.
Brooke Paup: I wanted to pass it back on to Queen, legend, icon of water planning Temple, she can lead the rest of this meeting.
Kelley Holcomb: I bet
Temple McKinnon: Thanks Director
Temple McKinnon: Paup.
Suzanne Schwartz: Well, I'm gonna. This is Suzanne Schwartz. I'm going to get us started just repeat kind of with a review of what we're about to do. And a couple of
Suzanne Schwartz: Reminders and the first reminder is that if you're not talking, if you could please mute yourself, we, we have to make a transcript of this
Suzanne Schwartz: Of this meeting, so that because of the Open Meeting Act or requirements and it's generated by Zoom automatically but it needs a lot of editing and when we get extraneous sounds from
Suzanne Schwartz: From you all the transcript ends up having things talking about a watermelon board or the waterboarding and
Suzanne Schwartz: I mean, it may continue to do that, but there
Suzanne Schwartz: There are a lot of other
Suzanne Schwartz: Things that I think will make it easier if if you
Suzanne Schwartz: can remain on mute. Vicki may actually mute people, if she's hearing noise from your computer, but you can always unmute yourself when you want to talk
Suzanne Schwartz: But that said, just a quick review of the agenda. We're going to start with public comment. If there is any have you read
Suzanne Schwartz: and approve Minutes from the last meeting and then take a look at the issues that you may want to consider. You generated a list last time we want to refine that a little bit.
Suzanne Schwartz: Kind of see if there's anything you want to add look at the grouping that we've done on those on those on those issues.
Suzanne Schwartz: And then you're going to consider how you want to move through your work on in looking at an action plan. And then let's maybe look at a report structure we're trying to get something
Suzanne Schwartz: That's at least gets us gets a sense of how you might structure it not the content, specifically, but just lets us begin to put things into the report as you generate them.
Suzanne Schwartz: And then we'll get into the substantive issues of enhancing interregional cooperation and and also possibly planning water resources for the state as a whole.
Suzanne Schwartz: And want to acknowledge that the agenda is probably very ambitious, but we will see how much of it we can get through and continue to adjust as we move into future meetings. I also want to thank
Suzanne Schwartz: Both Melanie Barnes and David Wheelock for consulting with us on the agenda. And then I also want Temple is going to give you a little bit of background about changes that we made to the agenda and the issues document between the time you initially saw it.
Temple McKinnon: Yeah, we worked thanks to Melanie and David for helping us out with the agenda committee and we had run some issues in an action plan through them and then pass that on to the whole council to consider. So
Temple McKinnon: After you all looked at it, we received from some feedback from Representative Larson's office and we had then reordered a couple of issues and added
Temple McKinnon: For your discussion today planning for water resources for the state as a whole. And this was
Temple McKinnon: Just to ensure that your issues are aligned with the bill authors intent that established this council. So that's what happened in the interim, from what you looked at and what will be. That's the structure of documents that will be looking at today.
Temple McKinnon: Oh, you're muted Suzanne.
Suzanne Schwartz: Thank you.
Suzanne Schwartz: I think we'll probably all be doing a little with that.
Suzanne Schwartz: With that, I think it unless there are any questions we're ready to start moving through the agenda.
Suzanne Schwartz: First up is public comment.
Temple McKinnon: I'll put the public comment instructions up.
Suzanne Schwartz: Yeah, we have. We're going to put a screen up with instructions. So if you are, if you are a member of the public and want to address the council. If you could
Suzanne Schwartz: Raise your hand on the screen, Vicki Read is going to be monitoring that to see if anyone is is wishing to speak, or if you're only on telephone hit star nine. And so we'll take just a pause to see if we've got any public comment. Vicki anything?
Vicki Read: I don't see anyone
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, but let's go ahead and then move on to the
Suzanne Schwartz: The substance of the meeting. Our next time is the minutes. I want to kind of put minutes in context for you. What we're trying to do with the Minutes.
Suzanne Schwartz: Is to make them somewhat detailed notes from the meeting, and we will be ideas are, you know, they're not verbatim, but
Suzanne Schwartz: Ideas are in there may be relevant for future meetings and we will be going through those through those minutes
Suzanne Schwartz: As we look to plan other meetings and if we want to populate ideas. Make sure they're things that we, that we don't miss from those so
Suzanne Schwartz: With that in mind, I guess we have two questions for you are the is the forum and detail sufficient to support discussion for you. Do you like the form. We've got those in at this point.
Suzanne Schwartz: If this. I think the easiest thing is, again, it's trying to figure this out. But if you could raise your hand if these are sufficient for you.
Suzanne Schwartz: Just let me know.
Suzanne Schwartz: I think I think I've got most most everybody I think
Suzanne Schwartz: If you have if you want to make some changes in the format for the
Suzanne Schwartz: Let me, let me do it as a negative. If you want to make changes to the format of the minutes left, raise your hand. And I think that'll be easier for me to see if there's anybody else that's wanting something different.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, I think that I think we've got agreement then from I don't see anyone who has any desire to change anything. So we'll go ahead and continue this format. And then the next is to seek approval. Does anyone
Suzanne Schwartz: Is there any one of you who does not agree to the approval of the minutes. It's just a lot easier for me to see hands that are, okay I am not seeing anyone who is is saying is
Suzanne Schwartz: That does not want to approve the minutes. If you do just visual verbally, let me know quickly.
Suzanne Schwartz: Sorry for the I know this is a little confusing, but I'm trying to figure out how to best manage this meeting. Okay. I think we've got a got a everyone who is attending who is approving the Minutes, then. Okay.
Suzanne Schwartz: We can Gail Peek: Sorry for the noise but just wanting to say, for those of us
Gail Peek: That are not visible. We agree with everything. And I didn't know if you needed a motion or anything, but I i think the format minutes are fine.
Suzanne Schwartz: We could, would you all like to work in motion format? I can certainly if that's your pleasure. We can certainly do that.
Kelley Holcomb: Honestly, I prefer it. But I'm one of 16.
Kelley Holcomb: So.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, well what what we might as well do that then
Suzanne Schwartz: We'll go ahead. Is anyone have a motion to approve the minutes.
Gail Peek: And I second.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, that was
Suzanne Schwartz: Who was the, who was saying who made the motion?
Temple McKinnon: Kelley Holcomb made
Temple McKinnon: The motion and Gail Peek seconded that motion.
Suzanne Schwartz: Great, thank you. Um, let's show your approval.
Suzanne Schwartz: Does anyone not vote for approval of the minutes then
Kelley Holcomb: Everyone needs to unmute if they're going to say anything.
Suzanne Schwartz: I'm hearing no one who didn't want to vote against approval. So we'll consider that to be unanimous at this point.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, good.
Suzanne Schwartz: Does that, does that method work to
Suzanne Schwartz: Seek
Suzanne Schwartz: It to seek someone who does not want to approve something. I think it's the easiest to do online, you know,
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay.
Suzanne Schwartz: OK, with that we'll go on to the issues. The looking at the issues that you all generated last time.
Temple McKinnon: Is this visible? Do I need to increase the size?
Mark Evans: Suzanne, this is Mark, can you hear me okay?
Mark Evans: I would like to
Mark Evans: Discuss scheduling. Would that be appropriate under this item or under item four?
Suzanne Schwartz: I think item four would be where we were anticipating that. Is that okay?
Mark Evans: That is okay.
Suzanne Schwartz: And absolutely appropriate we were hoping to have that discussion. So
Suzanne Schwartz: So this issues document that you see up there. If you'll recall that at the last meeting you brainstormed some ideas and had ended up with 10 issues that
Suzanne Schwartz: That were captured and that we were prioritized via a polling method.
Suzanne Schwartz: We took that list, and we put them into categories, thinking that they would be, you know, there may be similar issues or similar things that might address a common problem or a common topic. And so we have done categorize those in in this document.
Suzanne Schwartz: We, we have not attempted to make do any word smithing we did get a little word smithing that Region C's attorney provided about some distinctions on unappropriated
Suzanne Schwartz: water that did not seem to be, that that seemed to be
Suzanne Schwartz: Fair, neutral. And so we included those but you know my proposal to you will be that we as we get to a topic and start discussing and refining ideas we'll have lots of opportunity
Suzanne Schwartz: To do word smithing of this document and ultimately produce something for a final report that has wording that is more precise than what we what is noted here. So,
Suzanne Schwartz: With that in mind when with that my proposal is not to wordsmith, but to look at this and look at it and see.
Suzanne Schwartz: Take a look and see if you feel like the issues are grouped appropriately or any issues missing and a further question about whether you want to continue the distinction we have made about
Suzanne Schwartz: Action versus process or whether you just want to lump everything together. Some of this also just includes the red items include
Suzanne Schwartz: Language from Representative Larson in his letter to you that we wanted to make sure were captured appropriately and some of the
Suzanne Schwartz: Some of these items have been moved to different categories based upon the Representative's office's input. So you all got this document, but take a look for a few minutes and then move up, we will look at the questions about whether
Suzanne Schwartz: whether there are any issues, big issues missing that you at this time, want to include
Suzanne Schwartz: Or whether they they're whether they're grouped appropriately.
Suzanne Schwartz: Know that you can be, this can be added to as we go into a particular topic and we start talking. So this is not a static list. This is a list that we expect will change as we move through this process, but it is a starting point.
Kevin Ward: Suzanne, this is Kevin.
Suzanne Schwartz: Hi, Kevin.
Kevin Ward: Is this an appropriate time to start just discussing any part of it, like the planning for this.
Suzanne Schwartz: Sure. I'm good with that.
Kevin Ward: Okay, so I went back and reviewed a lot of the documents that
Kevin Ward: Were put out on the IPC
Kevin Ward: Part of the Water Board site.
Kevin Ward: And particularly paid attention to the previous state water plans, you and I, of course, were there when
Kevin Ward: They there was a decision made to move away from state water planning being done.
Kevin Ward: By the agencies from a central perspective that was I guess there was concern that they became book stops or they were controversial and
Kevin Ward: You know, these larger bigger plans for water resource planning that would be stake statewide needs.
Kevin Ward: Were helpful to implementing these projects. And so we didn't need to go to a bottom up proposal. So I went back and I looked at the 62 plan the 68, 82 and paid particular attention to the 62 to and the 82 plans and I found that they continue to reference the
Kevin Ward: 1957 Planning Act.
Kevin Ward: And
Kevin Ward: It evolved from the 62 act to the 82 act considerably and what I saw that as the water quality acts were passed by both the state and the federal government.
Kevin Ward: And then the flood control issues were were added because of, you know, originally, and of course drought was broken by floods. I mean, in 57
Kevin Ward: That there was a focus and those statewide planning efforts on planning, not only for the development of Water Resources for the future population and industry and agricultural state, but also considered, you know, a strong emphasis on meeting the water quality needs and the
Kevin Ward: Flood Control needs of the state all as a part of the planning process. And I submit that it's more of an afterthought right now.
Kevin Ward: Perhaps there needs to be some consideration given by the legislature to going back in the past and seeing what we through aside in the name of, you know, letting cities and these independent areas of districts build their own projects.
Suzanne Schwartz: So Kevin, are you suggesting that that the issue of whether water quality and flood control should be addressed in state in the water planning effort should be listed as an issue? Kevin Ward: I am. Yes.
Suzanne Schwartz: Where
Suzanne Schwartz: Would you, where would you put it?
Kevin Ward: Well, you want to if you want to do planning for the resources to the state as a whole, I think it fits right there.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, so we'll propose to
Suzanne Schwartz: Add that I guess.
Kevin Ward: Include more emphasis on water quality and
Kevin Ward: The flood control in our water supply planning process.
Suzanne Schwartz: So Temple was capturing these on on the document at this point.
Suzanne Schwartz: Like to hear from other members if you're
Carl Crull: The Water Development Board just sent out or is in process of identifying flood control by regions and or
Carl Crull: I think it would be like a parallel to regional water planning groups.
Carl Crull: For for each of the basins.
Carl Crull: So I'm not sure how those two would dovetail in together with what Kevin's talking about
Temple McKinnon: You're muted Kevin.
Kevin Ward: I think, well, I'm, you know, in the flood planning process, they're supposed to consider water supply as well
Kevin Ward: Yes. And there needs to be the, you know, when you have pointers and legislation towards different aspects of things.
Kevin Ward: Have one piece of legislation saying pursuant to chapter 15 in Chapter 17 you'll say, pursuant to the chapter 15 provision back in the
Kevin Ward: 15 you'll say pursuant to the chapter 17 provision. So I think that it just needs a pointer on the water supply side for the flood control.
Kevin Ward: And I don't really understand how the water quality aspects of it got to be just pretty much a checkmark in the planning process, but that's the way I view it right now. It
Kevin Ward: Seems like in the past as the as the, you know, we have the 1976 water quality act and then the 86 water, Clean Water Act and all of those things that led in between there bay and estuary.
Kevin Ward: All of that, you know, led the folks that were in the Water Board at the time and the Department of Water Resources, I guess.
Kevin Ward: Up until it became, you know, a swift separate a bunch of stuff off with planning back into the Water Board, which used to be the Board of Engineers.
Kevin Ward: But in all of that they be we shuffled the cards so much that it really became let's do water supply planning and figure out how to fund all this stuff with you guys in
Kevin Ward: These programs and let's just check the box to make sure the water plan doesn't conflict with water quality requirements doesn't conflict with
Kevin Ward: Environmental silver culture, agriculture, you know, all these other things instead of the water planning process directly in every case that they considered a strategy addressing those issues.
Kevin Ward: Maybe that helps with the conflicts
Kevin Ward: Too. I don't know.
Gail Peek: I agree with Kevin's comments because
Gail Peek: The other thing that's going to be very clear is as we look at some of the more innovative strategies like aquifer storage
Gail Peek: We're going to have water quality issues as you're combining different types of water. So Kevin I, I agree with you that we need to be very clear about
Gail Peek: More prioritization of quality dovetailing that is a whole issue of groundwater. I mean, our meeting Region G and all the regions now have a number of groundwater
Gail Peek: Members on the regional water planning groups. And that raises a whole other issue of water quality depending upon whether
Gail Peek: Your aquifer recharges or not. So, these, these areas are very important to keep in mind and keep prioritize along with everybody wants economic development, everybody wants growth. Now, but we have to look at some of these issues and see how it works with the state as a whole.
Carl Crull: Yeah, you know, with
Carl Crull: A lot of, you know,
Suzanne Schwartz: I'll get you, Melanie in just minute.
Carl Crull: Recently, you know, seawater desalinization is become
Carl Crull: en vouge, at least on the coast and there's been a lot of during regional water planning process. There was a lot of discussion about the water quality aspects of bays and estuaries.
Carl Crull: So, you know, as
Carl Crull: Different water supplies.
Carl Crull: Become more necessary and I think the water quality aspects.
Carl Crull: need a little more emphasis.
Suzanne Schwartz: Melanie, did you want to say something.
Melanie Barnes: Well, I concur with whatever everybody else has said, and I know sometimes we address it up and Region O, because we're looking at the possibility of using the Dockum.
Melanie Barnes: Which has higher salinity, but it just kind of gets mentioned in passing. Oh, we'll have to figure out how to clean it up.
Melanie Barnes: But it's but it can be a supply. And so, and I think this is now's the time to bring a little more serious discussion about water quality of different water sources back into the planning process. I agree.
Suzanne Schwartz: Well, um, if no one objects to we, you know, again, the, this isn't you know the adding the issues to the list is not saying
Suzanne Schwartz: You're going to you know how you're going to handle this or anything, but if it sounds like you, there are enough of you who would like to talk about this under the planning water resources for the state as a whole. And if it's if unless it does anyone object to adding that to the list.
Temple McKinnon: Sorry.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, well, we'll go ahead and add that any other again, remember that this is a this is the start of just being able to start generating further discussion. Does anybody have any other items that you feel like
Suzanne Schwartz: You want to add at this time to this this list of issues.
Steve Walthour: Suzanne
Mark Evans: This is Mark.
Suzanne Schwartz: Hi, Mark.
Mark Evans: I would speak to the dealing with a interregional conflict.
Mark Evans: I believe that this should be a forward looking report. And while we certainly can identify any interregional conflicts that have occurred in the past.
Mark Evans: Seems to me that we need to be forward looking, and forward thinking and see if we can anticipate problems that may and that can and probably will occur in the future as it relates to
Mark Evans: interregional coordination cooperation so okay
Mark Evans: If our time will allow us to do some
Mark Evans: Some of that.
Suzanne Schwartz: And
Mark Evans: Hopefully, you know, the this Council can then make some recommendations that perhaps can head off problems in the future.
Mark Evans: For the water planning process. Suzanne Schwartz: Mark is that captured under the second bullet
Suzanne Schwartz: Under dealing with interregional conflicts that says develop a formal process by which the Council will improve coordination between regions in the event of interregional conflict or is it more kind of proactive. Do you want something else to say develop a process to
Suzanne Schwartz: head off interregional cooperation, I'm trying to
Suzanne Schwartz: Make
Mark Evans: Well, if we, you know we're charged with the identifying conflicts. Yeah.
Mark Evans: Well, that will be fairly easy to do, with those that already exist or have occurred.
Mark Evans: But I certainly wouldn't speak to legislative intent, but
Mark Evans: It would seem that
Mark Evans: We should
MarkEvans: Consider that
Mark Evans: As to whether or not that piece
Mark Evans: Captured it, I really couldn't say.
Suzanne Schwartz: So maybe adding something that that maybe that would include
Suzanne Schwartz: Develop a process to prevent
Mark Evans: Well I doubt we could do that.
Suzanne Schwartz: Let me ask you another question. Is it possible that we deal with that under enhancing interregional coordination, there, and there are two topics that are
Suzanne Schwartz: Somewhat related but a little
Suzzanne Schwartz: Different
Mark Evans: Well, I'll leave it to Temple and Matt.
Melanie Barnes: I'm getting the sense that you're asking more for this group based on their knowledge.
Melanie Barnes: Maybe come up with a list of places where they see, there will be interregional use and that's meeting interregional coordination before those conflicts, is that when you're asking?
Mark Evans: That may capture it. Well, I'm just, I'm just
Mark Evans: Trying to
Mark Evans: As I said, be kind of forward looking in this report.
Mark Evans: Identifying conflicts.
Mark Evans: I think the Water Development Board the legislature, everyone, everyone in the planning process kind of seen those conflicts and knows where they've occurred.
Suzanne Schwartz: So what if we
Suzanne Schwartz: What if on that and under dealing was interregional conflict, we might say, the Council proactively consider ways to
Suzanne Schwartz: head off or to, to
Mark Evans: And to Melanie's point, it may be that it's something along the lines of trying to identify
Mark Evans: Potential areas of conflict in the regional water planning process something along those lines. I don't know.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, so
Mark Evans: I'm kind of just thinking out of the box here.
Suzanne Schwartz: So maybe. And again, we don't have to have a
Suzanne Schwartz: Fully wordsmith but want to capture it. So proactively consider potential areas of conflict and ways to
Suzanne Schwartz: Resolve early or something like that.
Kevin Ward: Suzanne, I'm not so sure he's the point of the heading off, or trying to prevent. It would be good to to identify where in the future we can expect there to be conflict, future conflicts and again, looking back at
Kevin Ward: back in 62 again and 82 that we're going to have a need for water to be developed because they're going to run out of the lake supplies in Region C.
Kevin Ward: And then we're going to have to get more water and they likely expected it come from the east, but you're right there. That's like painting a picture that you're going to have a conflict.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay.
Kevin Ward: We have the same thing for San Antonio. We know that. If it wasn't for desal we would have the same for Corpus Christi with some of that done by the Lydia Ann pipeline, not too terribly long ago, but we had to get Garfield. That was kind of controversial and you know you can just
Kevin Ward: paint a picture by looking at where the
Kevin Ward: Regions are in the growth is going and see that you're not going to have the water even in the High Plains if they down the road if they continue to use as much for irrigation, as they are they, they're gonna have to develop go deeper.
Kevin Ward: Which was what
Kevin Ward: A second ago. So I think, I'm not sure Mark, I don't speak for you. Were you specifically looking at how we could identify where there could be potential
Kevin Ward: Conflicts and maybe what decade, we're going to run into them? I mean, is that what you're asking?
Mark Evans: Yeah, I'm sorry. From where I'm sitting was kind of hard for me to hear what you were saying. But yeah, I believe so, from what I could
Mark Evans: Just the anticipation. I think it anytime you do a report like this for a legislative body identifying certain things you're going to look at, like, certainly I think want you to look at the future as well, and not just do a, capture a snapshot of what's already happened. So if there are
Mark Evans: If there's ways that we could identify
Mark Evans: Potential areas of conflict or ways there can be conflicts between regions.
Mark Evans: I think it'd be good.
Suzanne Schwartz: Great. Mark, I think they get
Mark Evans: Without getting too far out the weeds. At the same time, I mean, understanding the timeline of this planning.
Mark Evans: Suzanne Schwartz: Sure.
Suzanne Schwartz: I think Temple's captured the idea on on the issues document. The third second bullet under process at this point that says proactively consider potential areas of conflict and ways to coordinate in advance of conflict. Does that capture?
Mark Evans: I think that that's fine, I think. Kevin, you, you agree?
Carl Crull: Yeah, I agree. I think also
Carl Crull: You know, even though we've got a deadline and do a report by October, I see this interregional council continuing on in the future and serving as
Carl Crull: To address a lot of these issues as we go along in the future. I mean, this is not going to be a a council that's gonna die after October.
Suzanne Schwartz: And I think, you know, we talked at the last meeting about the idea that maybe as we move through we capture things that you all are going to do, but that are possible for later.
Suzanne Schwartz: Later, Jim. I think you want to say something.
Suzanne Schwartz: You need to unmute
Suzanne Schwartz: Still, still not unmuted.
Suzanne Schwartz: Jim, you're not, there, there.
Jim Thompson: Can you hear me now? Yeah, I agree with the Carl and
Jim Thompson: I know this Council wants to do absolutely as much as it can do. But I think there are certain mandates that we are required to do
Jim Thompson: And if I'm reading along correctly, it says, improve coordination among the regional water planning groups, and between each regional water planning group, regional water planning process. And then in the letter sense by Chairman Larson.
Jim Thompson: A couple of the bullet points were provide an outline of a plan to facilitate better interregional coordination in the future.
Jim Thompson: And to identify additional ways of the TWDB assist in interregional coordination and planning at a statewide level.
Jim Thompson: Like I said, I am for getting as much done through this Council as possible, but we are on an abbreviated timeline for this cycle.
Jim Thompson: And I think those are a couple of things. Certainly included in there that we can get done in a timely manner.
Jim Thompson: My thinking is that those should be the first couple of things that we do, and of course, I realize that it's all new. One of those items on the agenda today.
Jim Thompson: But I know there are a lot of things that each and every one of us would like to do, but I would like to get the mandated part out of the way, I think it would be good to get mandated part out of the way first and then move on to what else we can get done.
Suzanne Schwartz: Thank you Jim.
Suzanne Schwartz: And again, you know, the list is not intended to at this point, prioritize and so I appreciate your, your notation. I think it's worth keeping in mind that maybe one of the things we ask ourselves as we
Suzanne Schwartz: Approach all discussions is, is this the appropriate time for the discussions, what I'm hearing you say. Not whether the idea is important in the long run. But, but let's look at what we can do now.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, yes.
Steve Walthour: Suzanne, I'm sorry I I have something under planning water resources from the state as a whole.
Steve Walthour: I think one of the ways that interregionally we could work on solving some of these you know resource problems is
Steve Walthour: You know either this group or the you know the state support looking outside the state. For example, I have a
Steve Walthour: Group of people that are north of me and north of the Texas panhandle in those states and myself are interested in reviewing an old water study that was done back in 1976 to 82 about moving water
Steve Walthour: to the High Plains and as I read more into it, I thought, well, heck, this might be a good thing for the state of Texas to support and get behind.
Steve Walthour: In providing water to, for example, the Ogallala in our area. And I know that there has been opportunities for some entities to reach up into Oklahoma and try to get water and its been slapped back somewhat. So is there is there an opportunity for us to at least support development of
Steve Walthour: Outside water resources for the state to help solve some of our interregional problems.
Steve Walthour: Representative Larson spent quite a bit of time with me a couple years ago talking about that issue, trying to get to the point where we we could work collectively outside of, you know, with other states and solving those issues.
Steve Walthour: I would I would really like to have an opportunity for this group to at least recommend the legislature's support, development, you know, further development of our
Steve Walthour: Intrastate
Steve Walthour: Water resources to benefit,
Steve Walthour: You know resources for the state of Texas as a whole and for other states that could mutually benefit from large water supply projects.
Suzanne Schwartz: So yeah, I'm seeing that being captured right now on the screen.
Suzanne Schwartz: Does that capture what you're
Suzanne Schwartz: Suggesting?
Steve Walthour: Oh, absolutely.
Suzanne chwartz: Great.
Suzanne Schwartz: Um, are there other
Suzanne Schwartz: Yeah.
Steve Walthour: I just take one more thing to say about that. I know we we want to move on. We've spent a lot of time on this. Is that it today we look around, we think, okay, Oklahoma's not dealing with this or
Steve Walthour: You know very well, and we have some other issues on compacts across the states.
Steve Walthour: Especially if you start looking along state boundaries. I think 50 years from now, it's going to be another group of individuals trying to solve some of the same problems. We just need to move
Steve Walthour: Further along and trying to work on Interstate
Steve Walthour: Interstate cooperation.
Steve Walthour: Now, I'll shut up.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, thank you. Well, I want to know.
Temple McKinnon: Do you want me to capture that and your item, including interstate compacts or
Temple McKinnon: No. Okay.
Steve Walthour: No, we can that's that short enough
Steve Walthour: That might come up later.
Temple McKinnon: Okay, thanks.
Russell Schreiber: Suzanne this Russell.
Russell Schreiber: I fully support Steve's idea that's
Russell Schreiber: An outstanding idea, especially for regional groups along the border.
Russell Schreiber: And I mentioned to Larson during our drought and our Representative James Frank, that we would have we would have worked collaboratively collaboratively with the City of Lawton in Oklahoma.
Russell Schreiber: But we couldn't because they were across the state line in Oklahoma.
Russell Schreiber: So this would be a fantastic
Russell Schreiber: Charge for this group to ask the or to encourage the legislature to work along those lines.
Suzanne Schwartz: I failed to add since we're adding things let just let me get a show of hands. Does anyone have any concerns about adding this item about legislative support for interstate water resources if anyone have any concerns to add that at this point?
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, and then did. I'm trying to remember if we there was an item. Another item. I think it was about the inner the
Suzanne Schwartz: That we added. Did I go. It was down under the develop ways for or proactively consider potential areas of conflict and ways to coordinate in advance of conflict. Any concern about adding that?
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, I think we're, we're good with both of those on the list at this point. Does anyone have any other work issues, you'd like to add or
Suzanne Schwartz: Changes you'd like to make to this list at this point?
Suzanne Schwartz: I am not seeing any any responses. So I guess I'll ask the next question about our do you have, are you, do you have any changes, you'd make to where things are placed?
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay. Not seeing any responses on that either. And then the last question we had is it is it is there any benefit to separating these things into specific actions and process, or do you just want to collapse those into it collapse those together?
Suzanne Schwartz: I'm not hearing any any body with strong feelings, one way or another, I guess.
Suzanne Schwartz: At this point, shall we leave them. Does anyone have an objection to leaving them leaving it as it's structured then.
Suzanne Schwartz: Let me ask, do you feel like this requires a formal motion and vote or this is kind of a working document or are you all content with just keeping it as a working document that's not requiring a vote and a motion?
Suzanne Schwartz: I saw a nod. Does anyone object to that?
Mark Evans: Yes to the working
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, was that Kevin? Is that what you said?
Kevin Ward: That was Mark.
Suzanne Schwartz: Mark Yeah, okay, I'm having to visit a lot of things up there. I'm having trouble with. Well, I'm gonna unless I'm hearing somebody wanting a motion, we'll just assume you're this again it's working, it's, it's a changing document. And I think we're ready to move on to the next agenda item.
Temple McKinnon: Okay.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay.
Suzanne Schwartz: And please, if, if I'm moving on and I haven't and you want to be heard on something, you know, unmute yourself and say something
Suzanne Schwartz: Uh huh.
Melanie Barnes: Suzanne, this is Melanie. On the last one, I'm not sure I really see much difference between process and action in that develop a processes is an action.
Melanie Barnes: Yeah, that's just a personal thing and if this makes people be able to sort things easier than it's perfectly fine.
Suzanne Schwartz: Yeah.
Suzanne Schwartz: I it seemed initially as as possibly a distinction but as we work through this, we can collapse those if we want this. I think this is going to change as we work on items anyway, so
Suzanne Schwartz: Thank you. Melanie
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, let's move on to the action plan. And again, this was something that was developed, trying to find a way to move at least through
Suzanne Schwartz: The end of June, when we we may have an ability to do virtual meetings I, you know, want to acknowledge at you know up front on this that
Suzanne Schwartz: It's somewhat of a flow chart on how to tackle some of the issues in in these short meetings.
Suzanne Schwartz: It's likely a starting point for some of these topics I really expect, you're going to need to do work after after this series of meetings, if the if the series of meetings is even appropriate workable for you and
Suzanne Schwartz: Some questions about scheduling that we can get into, but there's just as background.
Suzanne Schwartz: You know, is it you know it is a lot. We're trying to find ways to start this process. And I think this discussion. I'm hoping you will
Suzanne Schwartz: You'll, you'll give, give us your thoughts about whether we're the flow of this is workable, whether the schedule is workable. Again, this is just through June understanding we'll probably have work after that.
Suzanne Schwartz: We've tried to kind of give you a sense of where we we thought we could work through and again we we consulted with
Suzanne Schwartz: With our agenda committee on this. I appreciate your, your input on this.
Suzanne Schwartz: You know, we're, we're hoping to give you a lot of background, give you background material before before the meetings. We want your input about what it what materials you would like to see to allow you to intelligently discuss these issues.
Suzanne Schwartz: And just would love your input on this and we can modify it, either now or thinking we'll get input from you right now and then modify it offline and get something back to you.
Temple McKinnon: I guess I want to interject so
Temple McKinnon: We're taking our rules for our Board to consider rule revisions that are just
Temple McKinnon: Requirements around this council. Let's go on June 4 to our board for their consideration and
Temple McKinnon: One of the items in those rules was the deadline for this council's report and and the draft we'd had October 14 but we've revised that language for the rules, it's going to our Board for final consideration.
Temple McKinnon: To remove October 14 and say a deadline, as determined by the executive administrator, but before the adoption of the 2022 state water plan.
Temple McKinnon: Be aware of that. I mean, that said, a legislative session begins in January and this groups to develop policy recommendations, there's
Temple McKinnon: Still that timeline.
Mark Evans: But that's very helpful Temple.
Suzanne Schwartz: Mark was it you who wanted to discuss
Mark Evans: Yes, it was. And I
Mark Evans: There's just so much value in the in person meeting and understand that right now we can't do that, but I'm just as I look at the action plan.
Mark Evans: And we're obviously
Mark Evans: Looking at this action plan on the very fast timeline, if you, if you look at it is if I understand it correctly, that you literally would have a draft report.
Mark Evans: From the June 22 meeting.
Temple McKinnon: I polled you all for your availability. The limited point in the future. Just knowing that were bound by a disaster declarations that only extend the month by the governor and so that
Temple McKinnon: You know that visual cue, they're going through June 11. I don't know if the governor is going to extend the disaster declaration so this remote environment can continue. So
Temple McKinnon: Or concern you know we we had planned an in person meeting before this whole situation began so
Temple McKinnon: That's something to be mindful of too.
Suzanne Schwartz: And Mark
Mark Evans: Well that's right. And I, as I recall the legislation actually included one requirement that there would be one public meeting of the Council.
Temple McKinnon: Well these are public meetings that we're holding right now.
Temple McKinnon: I'll say that. Yeah.
Suzanne Schwartz: Great, okay. I wanted to say Melanie. I see your hand up. I did want to respond to Mark.
Suzanne Schwartz: That it was not intended to have a full draft report. It was just that we may be populating things that you have
Suzanne Schwartz: Already discussed and resolved and just your attempt to kind of look at that and then see what what you still need to do. So I'm just kind of as a clarification point. But Melanie, you wanted to say something.
Mark Evans: But I agree says
Melanie Barnes: I agree Suzanne, that was my understanding that this was a chance to go through everything we need to consider and see where we kind of
Melanie Barnes: Zoom right along and places where we need to have either more discussion, subcommittees, whatever because we still have that in our
Melanie Barnes: Ability to do is to break it up into smaller committees if there's an issue that needs a smaller group to really have a longer discussion and then bring it back to the group. And so I didn't view it as a completed report or even a draft at that point I viewed it as
Melanie Barnes: Now we have gone over everything. Where do we have sticking points.
Suzanne Schwartz: Is that how does that Mark, do you still, given that it does that still concern you or does anyone else have concerns about
Suzanne Schwartz: That kind of those ideas of how you know we were just thinking there might be things we can like summaries of meetings, things like that that we can be dropping into the reports and it just gives you an opportunity to look at that language.
Suzanne Schwartz: And approve it as we get there if we've actually tackled an issue and have discussion about background in it, it'll let you kind of take a look at that.
Mark Evans: Well, is it my my recollection seems to be that we were not going to be working through committees or subcommittees at this Council.
Suzanne Schwartz: You did say
Suzanne Schwartz: You said you would
Suzanne Schwartz: Do that only if you felt like you needed to. So yeah, there's not a clear
Suzanne Schwartz: There was not a decision to use subcommittees but I think was a look at it as you as it to see if it is needed in the future. I'll have to look at the minutes, so there was definitely not a decision to do that.
Suzanne Schwartz: At this point.
Kelley Holcomb: Oh Suzanne and Temple. This is Kelley. Are essentially the way I'm seeing this is our June 10, June 22 meeting we're laying out, we're providing the outlines
Kelley Holcomb: And some level of detail for the topics that would hopefully set up for a long one day, maybe a two day in person meeting to get into the nuts and bolts of this stuff and slog our way through it.
Kelley Holcomb: Am I interpreting this incorrectly?
Suzanne Schwartz: I think that is definitely a possibility of how that would work. Yeah, it is. We're using this is essentially a way to set up for for tackling and in the future maybe have some initial discussions, maybe make some decisions. But yes, I think that that is the intent.
Gail Peek: We were primarily a brainstorming trying to see how we were going to accomplish anything with this limited time period that we were actually in session
Gail Peek: Because
Gail Peek: We disappear and the next group comes up.
Kelley Holcomb: Well that's, that's exactly correct. I mean, that's what we're doing. Assuming that we may or may not be elected or appointed to the Council, at some point in the next cycle but
Kelley Holcomb: We did this in 2013 when the prioritization processes went through. Mark and others, Tomas was there. Those were
Kelley Holcomb: I'm not going to call them brutal, but they were sessions that were in a lot of heavy lifting involved and this is the same process all over again maybe somewhat less dramatic, but still the same process so
Kelley Holcomb: At some point, we all need to get room and just figure it out because these Zoom meetings are difficult to tackle this type of topic.
Steve Walthour: I think you're going
Steve Walthour: To need at least
Steve Walthour: In my list.
Steve Walthour: I think you're going to need at least somebody if it's not a committee, but people taking bits and pieces.
Steve Walthour: And taking shots at what should be in this report, doing a draft, for example, the policy issue that I brought up putting it in on paper for at least the group to look at before we get to
Steve Walthour: You know, our big group hug at the end, you know, somewhere in this process. I don't think you can just continue to to meet like this. I don't know how you get a document together.
Steve Walthour: Doing just this issue. So we're going to have to either have assignments or someone's going to have to volunteer to at least take pieces of this to get us some sort of working
Steve Walthour: Document together.
Steve Walthour: I. Does anyone agree with that?
Mark Evans: Completely agree. Yeah, well, I guess you know Kelley's point was in the stakeholder process typically what we would do is I recall, we would meet in the afternoon.
Mark Evans: One day, and then meet again the following morning or meet all day, and perhaps the following morning and the Water Development Board staff would
Mark Evans: Would work on the draft document as we discussed it and met the following morning, so that's kind of speaks to the value of those in person meetings.
Kelley Holcomb: Yeah, and other than the consensus.
Kelley Holcomb: Based component of that which I was an opponent of
Kelley Holcomb: Very valuable to be live and in person.
Kelley Holcomb: So that we could debate these things without some of the interruptions that technology.
Kelley Holcomb: Causes
Temple McKinnon: I want to interject. I agree. It's still not clear to me what my limitations are in finding a meeting space that can accommodate this group and staffing needs.
Temple McKinnon: Under current guidelines. So just factor that into your timing as well.
Kelley Holcomb: Unless we're going to do it in the park right, there's there's nowhere there's nowhere to go.
Kelley Holcomb: I guess you could
Temple McKinnon: So we're just trying to accommodate what we can through this method. I mean, All I'm doing is just acknowledging what y'all are saying and want you all to know Suzanne and I are
Temple McKinnon: feeling that way as well. I just don't have a determinant date when I can convene an in person meeting to give you all a goal to shoot towards. That's the challenge.
Suzanne Schwartz: And I do want to say too that, you know, as we
Suzanne Schwartz: I think I'd welcome any ideas you have to because we are in this process now and and we're we're stuck with virtual meetings. If you all have ideas about how to
Suzanne Schwartz: Make these better I really welcome them, you know, this is not something I think most. I mean, it's nice in that
Suzanne Schwartz: We can take off short bites and not have to travel, but it's not nearly as as productive in many ways as meeting in person. But, but, so if you've got ideas about how we can make this better.
Suzanne Schwartz: I'd suggest we do that offline, rather than in the meeting, but I really
Suzanne Schwartz: Hope you will share those you know what's work, will you know will actually give you an assignment after the meeting just, you know,
Suzanne Schwartz: Let us know what worked, what could do, what could we do better. What, how can we improve this process because this is what we're
Suzanne Schwartz: We are in right now, and I really appreciate y'all hanging in there and I acknowledge your frustration because I also feel fairly frustrated with trying to do this in this manor.
Tomas Rodriguez: Suzanne? Tomas.
Tomas Rodriguez: May I speak? Suzanne Schwartz: Sure
Tomas Rodriguez: Okay, I agree with Kelley been here for the last session to. And I looked at the minutes we said that subcommittees good at this time, we're not required that
Tomas Rodriguez: under number five consideration how Council operate and you also said that we also agree that 10 to 15 voting members would be a simple majority.
Tomas Rodriguez: And with all due respect to them, but we we started asking if there's anybody that disagrees with something is only one person that we can be discussing every item for long, long time.
Tomas Rodriguez: So all I want to do is remind us what we agreed to. Thank you.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, thanks. Would you would Tomas, would it be better than some some of what I'm doing by that is simply to see if if it's almost a way of taking a vote.
Suzanne Schwartz: And if I got, you know, again, if we got a majority if if we had a majority still approving it at that point we, you know, I would probably
Suzanne Schwartz: See if y'all want to move on. I acknowledge that I just, I'm trying to figure out a way to to gauge where you are on this and that almost is an easier way than trying to make sure everybody's hand is, you know, see where the hands are raised positively.
Tomas Rodriguez: If I may, I glad I'm not in your position. Okay. And I understand what you're trying to do. And I understand that have just wanted to remind us all. But we agreed to how we can handle it. This is one of the first time we've done a virtual thing to
Tomas Rodriguez: TV cameras and everything else. But in any event, let's see how we can move this thing based on what we've agreed to. Thank you.
Suzanne Schwartz: Great.
Thank you, Tomas. I appreciate it.
Suzanne Schwartz: Are we just does any is I think we were basically at the action plan. Is there anything y'all want to
Suzanne Schwartz: suggest changes on at this point to that or are we are you willing to try to move forward with that
Suzanne Schwartz: At this point?
Kelley Holcomb: And I'm assuming we're still on agenda item number four. Suzanne.
Suzanne Schwartz: Yes. I'm actually trying to see if we're ready to
Suzanne Schwartz: move on from that.
Mark Evans: Okay, Suzanne this is Mark.
Mark Evans: I have a question.
Suzanne Schwartz: Let me see.
Suzanne Schwartz: Uh, Kevin
Suzanne Schwartz: Mark was trying to trying to
Suzanne Schwartz: See
Mark Evans: I'm sorry.
Mark Evans: I wanted to be clear on the drafting of the report. Will that be done by Water Development Board staff? Is that correct?
Suzanne Schwartz: I think that is not yet determined. I think the staff will be working on it. I may drop pieces in from the this and we hope you all will add to it as you is, you know, if you want to take on ownership of it that
Matt Nelson: We will support the group as as required.
Temple McKinnon: Right.
Matt Nelson: Whatever's needed
Temple McKinnon: Build it as we go was the thought because there might be multiple hands in it.
Mark Evans: Y'all will do the typing.
Suzanne Schwartz: Suzanne. Did you, did you want to say something?
Suzanne Scott: Yeah. Just, just a couple of quick things. First of all,
Suzanne Scott: If we don't, this is just a logistical question. I can't attend all the meetings as they were scheduled. I mean, I know it was a by a majority vote. Can we have other
Suzanne Scott: alternates participate for us if we're unable to attend one of the meetings? Is that possible? That's my first question. My second question is, when Temple mentioned earlier.
Suzanne Scott: That she may get the permission to extend the deadline for this report, will we then come back and modify this schedule, if
Suzanne Scott: We do get a little bit more of an extended timeline to get this done. I just was trying to figure out how that action that she talked about earlier, that could potentially happen would modify, if at all, the schedule that's in front of us here today. Thank you.
Suzanne Schwartz: Temple?
Temple McKinnon: Um, you know, our Board did not
Temple McKinnon: When your
Temple McKinnon: Planning groups nominated you all, no alternates were submitted for all of the groups. So, um,
Temple McKinnon: I would have to ask our general counsel the legalities of alternate participation, seeing as you don't have bylaws, and all of that. So I will get back to you on that just from a public meeting since I don't know what's allowed off the top of my head.
Suzanne Scott: If nothing else, I mean, I could just have a staff member take notes if that's appropriate and not participate. I mean, I just didn't I needed to give a sense of, of that whatever whatever is available.
Temple McKinnon: I'll get back to you all. As far as the deadline revising your action plan.
Temple McKinnon: I guess as the board. We're looking to you all to understand what you want to submit prior to a legislative session or you know where where you're feeling you have short term
Temple McKinnon: Issues to identify or longer term issues. And so I don't have an indication for my executive administrator what that date is going to be that he's going to determine
Matt Nelson: I think there might there might be a little
Temple McKinnon: Now.
Matt Nelson: All right, I think there might be a little chicken, the egg effect with that timing. I mean, depending on what you all are doing and what might be
Matt Nelson: Something that you can coalesce in a report might influence our EA's choice of timing, so that we can pick a good time. That's the idea of not fixing the time in the in the rule. So there's a little bit of that in the background.
Matt Nelson: To support you all that date.
Kelley Holcomb: Yeah. So in theory, our drop dead date is we've got to have this
Kelley Holcomb: We've got to have this report approved and official no later than the adoption of the regional water plans or the state, the regional water plan.
Temple McKinnon: Correct.
Temple McKinnon: The state water plan.
Kelley Holcomb: So we've
Got the time.
Matt Nelson: That the we estimate the date of that is around June or July next year. Yeah.
Matt Nelson: So,
Kelley Holcomb: If we want to give ourselves an artificial deadline, at the very least.
Steve Walthour: Is this report.
Steve Walthour: This report going to be
Steve Walthour: Used in the Texas legislature this coming session?
Matt Nelson: The report is to the Board our Board.
Steve Walthour: Is the Board
Steve Walthour: going to use this report in the upcoming legislative session?
Matt Nelson: If we get, if the Board gets information from this group in the form of a report
Matt Nelson: prior to the Board taking action on on information that may or go to the legislation, legislature, they could take it into account. But it's, we don't know what the Board will do with whatever it is y'all produce and the timing will depend on when
Matt Nelson: You all produce something for their consideration and the original October date, and correct me if I'm wrong Temple. The original October date was default just to have something early enough that that could be incorporated in the state water plan at least.
Matt Nelson: In the
Matt Nelson: Ground doesn't mean y'all can't provide information to the Board for consideration along the way. And it's really up to y'all how you what you do and when
Kelley Holcomb: Well, just having done this for a day or two. You know as well as I do that the legislature gave us these processes to complete. Y'all gave us these processes to complete. It's gonna come up in the next legislative session, you know, it will even though there's not a deadline or any other
Kelley Holcomb: qualifier, it's going to come up. And we need to proceed as if it's going to be used in in committee hearings in the next session.
Kelley Holcomb: If we don't, then we are potentially shooting ourselves in the foot.
Mark Evans: Well, why don't we set a goal for say, December 1?
Kelley Holcomb: I have no objections to that other than the relevance to the October deadline that Matt and Temple were referring to.
Mark Evans: Well, I think we'll know when that deadline was established, it didn't anticipate the circumstances we'd be working under.
Kevin Ward: All the interim reports will be done before December 1, so I mean, the October deadline probably is better for us getting any kind of hearing out of any of this stuff because I know there's, especially if there's any bills filed
Kevin Ward: Because of the pre-filing deadline.
Kevin Ward: Yeah. Well, I mean,
Kevin Ward: How much more can we do if we had longer period of time. At
Kevin Ward: some point you reach diminishing returns.
Mark Evans: Yeah we just
Mark Evans: Kevin, my only
Mark Evans: real concern about the October 14 or 15th deadline is that we may not be able to utilize the value of in person meetings in say, July or August
Mark Evans: If those are possible, then
Kevin Ward: Well, yeah, but still if there's a resurgence in this thing. And we're still going to be in the same duck soup, we're in right now.
Kevin Ward: We just need to plan to be in the
Kevin Ward: current environment, not
Kevin Ward: too overly concerned about that. If we do want to do in face to face meetings, I think the gatherings are supposed to be limited to what 50, something like that.
Kevin Ward: We could actually find a way to meet if you want to. We just got a big room where we could have six foot social distancing, wear masks and
Kevin Ward: You're right, but
Steve Walthour: But my suggestion on
Steve Walthour: My suggestion on this guys is that, you know, we can talk about yeah we're going to get to meet, may meet in June, may meet in July, may meet in August.
Steve Walthour: I think we operate under the assumption that this is the way we're going to do this and be pleasantly surprised if we can get together. Now, I realized that most of us looking around on this list.
Steve Walthour: We're all old and we're not really very good at this.
Melanie Barnes: Ha ha ha
Steve Walthour: We're gonna have to get good at it and us complaining about, or saying that we need to have a meeting together isn't going to happen until the governor tells us, it can happen. And I don't know when that's gonna be.
Steve Walthour: Okay, so let's let's just move forward on this.
We
Kevin Ward: If the governor doesn't extend the disaster declaration
Kevin Ward: Past where it is in place right now.
Kevin Ward: We will be required to meet in person. We can't meet like this except under disaster declaration. So we're pretty much
Kevin Ward: bound to it.
Kevin Ward: So we'll know pretty soon whether he extendeds or not.
Suzanne Schwartz: Did Shannon want to say something? I see that Shannon, Shannon Houston, a representative from the House Natural raised her hand. Did you want to say something?
Suzanne Schwartz: Shannon, if you're saying something you're muted.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, I'm assuming not then I just, you had there was something that popped up. Yeah. Patrick wants to say something.
Melanie Barnes: Suzanne
Patrick Brzozowski: I'm just
Patrick Brzozowski: was gonna agree with what Kevin was talking to.
Patrick Brzozowski: And Kelley.
Patrick Brzozowski: You know, I do think this is going to be used in a legislative session.
Patrick Brzozowski: There is a time limitation.
Patrick Brzozowski: Most of that information going to those committees, the charges.
Patrick Brzozowski: Are going to be well before I'll say December.
Patrick Brzozowski: And so I think that October date, whether it's arbitrary or not. It's an arbitrary target, but I think we try to keep that if we if we don't get through to November, fine, but I think we keep it sooner than later.
Suzanne Schwartz: So I'm hearing
Melanie Barnes: I have
Melanie Barnes: I have a comment.
Melanie Barnes: Suzanne. This is Melanie, I think that
Melanie Barnes: I agree, we had, we had for that October deadline. But I also think that this committee can
Melanie Barnes: Set, assess whether they've got something to put forward that would be positive, with regard to any possible legislation and put that forward. And if we decide as a group, there are other things that we would like to continue to talk about work on because we're still a committee.
Melanie Barnes: We can do that also. And I
Melanie Barnes: I don't know that there would be a problem. But you can let me know if there is with basically a two part report.
Melanie Barnes: Because someone mentioned leaving a track for the next committee following us whether we're all be appointed again or not. We don't know. And so I think that
Melanie Barnes: That's useful. So I think, you know, tackling and putting forward the things that may be useful when considering legislation for the next session and having that done by October 14 to the best of our ability is good.
Melanie Barnes: And then if there are other issues that we want to pursue further to leave a record for the following group. I think we should consider that, since we're still a group
Suzanne Schwartz: So I'm hearing a lot, kind of, a lot of you saying let's assume we're going to work. We're going to be working virtually if we can do something differently, we will. Let's
Suzanne Schwartz: You know, appreciate the extended deadline. But there's some I've certainly heard urgency from some of you to try to get something that the legislature can deal with by October ish and so
Suzanne Schwartz: If I again let's if if that I can reflect that on the action plan if you want, or just there'll be it'll be reflected in the minutes possibility of a bifurcated report as we can
Suzanne Schwartz: You know, one that initially deals with legislative issues and another that deals with other issues that either you or do you are resolving or that are for future
Suzanne Schwartz: Councils. Again, if it unless it unless someone is it seriously, you know, if that seems to be a general trend on what you're saying.
Suzanne Schwartz: Can we move forward with that assumption at this point?
Suzanne Schwartz: Again, I'm just trying to keep the meeting moving. We've got a, you know, got a lot of challenging work ahead. Does anyone have concerns with that approach?
Suzanne Schwartz: I am not seeing any
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay. Well, I think we're ready then to move forward to the next agenda item.
Suzanne Schwartz: And that is the agenda item on the report structure and content. Again, this was just something we had had kind of put out as a sense of what
Suzanne Schwartz: Of what it could look like you know an executive summary, provide history and background of the Council, including your legislation. Your formation, your protocols, try to
Suzanne Schwartz: As as item 2 C includes some of the major meeting meeting your, you know, go meeting by meeting about some of your accomplishments and then
Suzanne Schwartz: The main part of the report would be tackling the various issues you have decided to handle including kind of a description of the issue and background and then reflecting your discussions and your ultimate recommendation.
Suzanne Schwartz: This is going to change as we move move forward. I don't think this is in any way set in stone, but I'd love to hear if you have any major concerns about this structure or ways to improve it.
Suzanne Schwartz: You know, we were just hoping we could be putting things into the report if if anything is if we can put things in at least it gives us a way to start to organize it. Totally can, it can be totally revamped.
Kelley Holcomb: Oh. Question this is Kelley Holcomb. Question, are we anticipating this being a standalone item or an appendix in the state water plan, or both?
Suzanne Schwartz: Temple or Matt?
Matt Nelson: This would be a report to the agency. And what the agency does after that is to be determined.
Matt Nelson: What that'll be so it's a report. It's a standalone from this group.
Kelley Holcomb: Standalone, along with possible inclusion into other documentation at some point in the game.
Matt Nelson: It, depending on what yes it will be considered in various ways, but itself will be its own document.
Mark Evans: And Matt, then each member of the council would sign off on it. Right?
Matt Nelson: That depends on how you want to
Matt Nelson: Operate that's the ideal thing. Is everyone signs off on what y'all produce yes that's what we'd like.
Mark Evans: Or had the opportunity to sign off on it.
Matt Nelson: Yeah, that's, that's what you want to do.
Kelley Holcomb: Yeah, I think that's a definite affirmative.
Suzanne Schwartz: Yeah.
Suzanne Schwartz: One of the questions, then it's going to be, and I think we can deal with this and maybe resolve it as we get into discussions, but there may be the question maybe if you're having disagreements over
Suzanne Schwartz: Do we reflect that, you know, various you know that you know there were differing opinions on on how to handle this, or about this issue, we could reflect some of that in the report, but, you know, so I think we need to be aware that
Suzanne Schwartz: It could, it can be complex in terms of reflecting your unanimity and or where there are divergences of view. Does that, does that make sense?
Kelley Holcomb: This is Kelley, it does make sense. And I think it is important for the record for those dissents, the whole process to be captured. But again, this is a report that will end up becoming a public document and used for public purposes.
Kelley Holcomb: We can worry about those kinds of issues as we work through the document process and and as it evolves. I mean, there may be no serious, dissents that we need to note in the report itself.
Kelley Holcomb: I remember touching some of this on the prioritization process we went through in 13.
Kelley Holcomb: And I don't remember us having any dissenting opinions in that we talked about it. And there were some dissenting ideologies and so forth. But I don't think we ended up, we ended up with reports. It was unanimous, if I recall, which would be good for this as well, in my personal opinion.
Mark Evans: Kelley. I believe that's correct. I believe it was unanimous once we got to the end of the process that everyone signed off on it.
Kelley Holcomb: That's gonna that's gonna be Suzanne's a victory for consensus based
Kelley Holcomb: decision making.
Suzanne Schwartz: I don't know, I might have. I think I got a few extra gray hairs and probably a few people who were really frustrated with me after that process.
Suzanne Schwartz: Um,
Kelley Holcomb: So with all that I'm good with the report. I mean, it's a good solid layout. We can play with the format and other things as we move through the process.
Suzanne Schwartz: Anyone have concerns with with moving forward. Again, it's going to change, but
Suzanne Schwartz: Unless I just
Suzanne Schwartz: express any concerns you have or send me, send you can send me an email if you have things you're thinking that, you know, we could do to improve it and
Suzanne Schwartz: You know, rather than spend a lot of time on that. You know, we've got a pretty short agenda and I want to respect trying to get to some more substantive discussions.
Mark Evans: Seems like a good outline.
Tomas Rodriguez: Suzanne, I agree with Kelley.
Tomas Rodriguez: This is Tomas. I agree with Kelley.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, thank you, Tomas.
Suzanne Schwartz: I think we're ready to move on them just
Suzanne Schwartz: The next item is really some of the meat of kind of starting to talk substantively about about the topic of
Suzanne Schwartz: Inter of how to enhance interregional coordination and planning resources for the state as a whole.
Suzanne Schwartz: We're going to start
Suzanne Schwartz: Again, when we talk about this, we're going to reflect the things you've already noted in terms of issues.
Suzanne Schwartz: And we want to start this with Temple's going to give you guys some background. I know a lot of we've, I've heard several comments that you know we need a good starting place.
Suzanne Schwartz: That we can build on. So as we discuss this. So two things I one will Temple will be giving you that background. There's a lot. There's materials on your website for you to review on both on both of these topics. And then we would love to hear from you if you need additional material.
Suzanne Schwartz: So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Temple to give you some background.
Temple McKinnon: Okay and I'm going to do a time check here it's 11:20 so I'm going to go through most of the material that's up there. I'm going to stop at the end. If you have any questions, but if I'm going too fast, let me know. I'm just trying to
Temple McKinnon: Get face to get through, so I wanted to start off with reminding you all, as you know, each of the regions submitted a technical memoranda to the Board back in September of 2018.
Temple McKinnon: And then following the submittal of those, they were all made available on our website. So this is just a screenshot of our web page that has had that information available for you.
Suzanne Schwartz: Temple, Temple you're not
Suzanne Schwartz: It's not up.
Temple McKinnon: It's not up?
Suzanne Schwartz: The action plan was still up so
Suzanne Schwartz: The structure. There you go.
Okay.
Temple McKinnon: All right. Are you seeing a technical memoranda September 2018 side. Alright.
Temple McKinnon: So this is just, I'm not going to go back and forth and screen share all this stuff. So it's just a static image of what our web page looks like where that information has been available.
Temple McKinnon: All of these reports had standardized data reporting requirements for the projections, source availability, existing supplies, needs or surpluses.
Temple McKinnon: Source water balances after existing supplies had been allocated and a comparison of those conditions to the previous plan.
Temple McKinnon: These reports also included the documented process to identify and the resulting list of potentially feasible strategies for the region and the group also included whether they were pursuing a simplified planning option for this cycle.
Temple McKinnon: During the next planning cycle, these midpoint reports will also include a list of strategies the group has determined to be infeasible.
Temple McKinnon: And this is a statutory requirement which will which defines infeasibility as whether the proposed sponsor has taken an affirmative vote or actions to make expenditures
Temple McKinnon: To construct or file permits on a schedule consistent with the need in state water plan. So each region is going to be looking to local information as they're coming up with those infeasible projects.
Temple McKinnon: And also when I'm infeasibility, I'm going to note that during this planning cycle. These are the first plans that will have to specifically document why desalination and ASR were not considered feasible.
Temple McKinnon: And we can provide that aggregate information to the Council from the draft plans that are currently under review if that would be helpful.
Temple McKinnon: Is there any questions about the technical memoranda?
Temple McKinnon: Okay.
Temple McKinnon: Um, this is a view of an interactive needs map that we generated following the receipt of the technical memos.
Temple McKinnon: It's draft plan data to display water user group needs and surpluses across the state.
Temple McKinnon: The intent was to be a resource for the planning groups to visualize entities and near proximity with needs that could be met.
Temple McKinnon: With the shared or regionalized project. So we sent this out to all planning groups in October of 2018. I've included this tool in your background materials since it was devised to assist you all with interregional coordination.
Temple McKinnon: And I'm using fixed image slides just because this map is live link to our database and can take a minute to load, but I do encourage you to go and investigate it for
Temple McKinnon: Any regional opportunities and check it out. Can you see it okay because I could zoom up if you need me to try to increase the size of them, let me know.
Kevin Ward: Temple I tried that this morning and I could not zoom into nothing.
Kevin Ward: Wide map. And every time I tried to bring it in. We got a pretty high speed internet here in the office every time I tried to bring it up, you know, closer or even start closer and click on municipal or all WUG needs
Kevin Ward: Yeah, back to the big map that look like a blob.
Temple McKinnon: Okay, there's let me try to orient you, a little bit on the functionality of it here.
Temple McKinnon: So here on your left, as Kevin was talking about, there's three ways to view this data, you can check out municipal WUGs by clicking on this bar.
Temple McKinnon: Or you can look at non municipal WUGs. Or you can look at all of them for the state as a whole. The municipal WUGs are going to be round dots, the non union WUGs are diamond shaped.
Temple McKinnon: Um, so in some areas, these WUG points are going to appear stacked on top of each other. And if you can see my cursor here, but right here you see ones like green on top of a red municipal WUGs is due to their really close proximity.
Temple McKinnon: All of the non municipal WUGs are going to be stacked because we use a county centroid to reflect those countywide water user groups.
Temple McKinnon: And so if you run into that situation down here on the left, there's gonna be a pop up for each of these WUG points down here on the left, you'll see you next feature arrow that you can scroll through and it'll, it'll give you pop up data for each WUG that's stacked.
Temple McKinnon: The color coding here to the right, top right of the legend.
Temple McKinnon: The red, red WUGs. They those mean their needs occurring before 2040 again this is the draft data that's currently being reviewed and your IPPs.
Temple McKinnon: The yellow WUGs have needs that exist in 2040 or later. That small gray dot means that water user group has no need. And if there's a green dot, not only does it not have a need. It has a surplus and one or more decades.
Temple McKinnon: Here.
Temple McKinnon: As Kevin was talking about. It starts off as a statewide map you can just what I typically do Kevin as I zoom in.
Temple McKinnon: You can click on a region, but you're still going to have to kind of grab the screen and move it and zoom in, as a tool. This is a static
Temple McKinnon: Image, so I can't show you the true functionality of it, but you can either hit this zoom button, the plus or minus, or just grab it and move it kinda like you would a Google Map. That's how it works. So hopefully
Matt Nelson: And anybody can call us and we can we can work with you to
Temple McKinnon: Absolutely. Really happy to walk you through it.
Kevin Ward: I'll try it again. But what happened, each time I got it to like an area I want to look at and I clicked on it could get any of these
Kevin Ward: Details it zoomed back out to the state what the original version of the statewide map.
Temple McKinnon: Be careful not to hit on the Gulf of Mexico. I think that makes it kind of revert to a statewide maps. So maybe you're
Kevin Ward: And I mean literally zoomed in, like, you've done here for the region that I wanted. And then I clicked the
Kevin Ward: Municipal and what it did is it shot back out to before I zoomed. It zoomed back out.
Kevin Ward: Right before it comes back in. I mean, did I just not wait long enough?
Matt Nelson: Maybe, maybe.
Temple McKinnon: And has some loading delays not significant, but it's just it's a big database that it's pulling directly. So
Kevin Ward: I'll try again.
Temple McKinnon: Be patient with it. Yeah.
Temple McKinnon: So this next slide is just an example of if you found a WUG you were interested in looking at, and that's the pop up of the data that presents. So I'm giving you the city of Round Rock, as an example, um, you can see here it's pointing to
Temple McKinnon: This red WUG here and again the intent was to visualize information of your proximity needs. So here's a cluster of water user groups with needs, click on that and actually see the drill down data, you can have the county and basin information is presented.
Temple McKinnon: You also see that there's the needs and surpluses over the planning horizon as well as needs expressed as a percent of demand.
Matt Nelson: So, yes.
Matt Nelson: This was so you can visually you know you can have lots of tables but to actually tie things together to say
Matt Nelson: you know water is heavy you know physicality matters. It's not electricity, clearly. So they can have assist regions and their consultants mostly consultants visualize, you know, Where is there a cluster of
Matt Nelson: Needs that could be several small entities with with with needs, maybe that that makes sense for a certain project to serve all those entities, but that's not always going to be the case either.
Matt Nelson: But you can at least identify, you know, groups of folks who might want to work together on a project or and that's when they have needs and the other
Matt Nelson: Way to look at is, there's somebody with a need, maybe there's someone nearby, who has a surplus supply, they could hook in.
Matt Nelson: And connect as a source for drought. So it's to help process the information at the planning on the fly level. It's not a final
Matt Nelson: snapshot of the data until the final plans are down in this really this visualization turns into the interactive state water plan website. But that's the idea is to help tool to facilitate that.
Temple McKinnon: Right one tool we developed this round for you guys to use your plans together.
Kelley Holcomb: Matt or Temple, are these unmet water demands are these demands that have strategies associated with them?
Temple McKinnon: These there's this does not reflect strategies at all. It's simply needs.
Matt Nelson: So then you figure out what strategies you need, you look at this, to help you maybe connect things together for those strategies.
Temple McKinnon: This is yeah, this is not after strategies have been applied to
Temple McKinnon: Any of the data presented here.
Matt Nelson: And your consultants all have this when they were developing plans this cycle. This was the first time we created this tool. Thanks to Temple's shop.
Temple McKinnon: But that's up there. It's linked on the Planning Council website if y'all want to take the time to look at it, it's just one tool and maybe it'll trigger some other ways we could help you all out, putting your plans together. But any questions?
Temple McKinnon: Okay, I'm going to move on to the next item. This um this information of sharing strategies serving multiple regions. This is data that was in
Temple McKinnon: That is in the draft plans that are currently being reviewed and this was requested by council member at the last meeting to support your discussion on multi regional projects.
Temple McKinnon: I'm going to it as a fixed image just to orient you, but we can move to screen share if that'd be helpful for you. The spreads the spreadsheet online. The first tab is a readme tab that
Temple McKinnon: Explains the data information contained and this is a screenshot of that second tab.
Temple McKinnon: On the left is the region in which the strategy sponsor is located WMS sponsor region.
Temple McKinnon: Generally here, the strategy names are generally across regions, they identify the sponsors of the strategy. You can see here
Temple McKinnon: You know CRMWA
Temple McKinnon: That there's some some strategies that don't necessarily have a sponsor identified in the name. And then here to the right is a concatenated version of all of the regions which have water user groups that would be benefiting from the strategy.
Temple McKinnon: This is just a screenshot. In total there were 32 of these multi regional strategies serving more than one region.
Temple McKinnon: From a total of seven sponsor regions.
Temple McKinnon: So, the other tabs that are included in that spreadsheet. There's the third tab has some additional information of each specific water user group that's been benefiting from each strategy.
Temple McKinnon: And then the last tab in that spreadsheet is that percentage share of the statewide strategy volume to which those multi regional strategies represent.
Temple McKinnon: Do you have any questions about that or did you want to look at the spreadsheet directly or keep going?
Temple McKinnon: That was a compound question. I'm gonna keep going.
Temple McKinnon: And lastly, so
Temple McKinnon: We put up their links to these documents and state water plans and the Trans-Texas Water program sounds like Kevin to look at them.
Temple McKinnon: These were posted in response to council members request at the last meeting. And so these are the historical documents of our statewide planning efforts.
Temple McKinnon: 1961-97 being the state developed plans and 2001 to 2017 being the plans developed through the current regional process.
Temple McKinnon: The Trans Texas Water program stem from the 1993 inter agency agreement between the Board, TNRCC and Parks and Wildlife
Temple McKinnon: It supported the consensus based 97 state water plan, which was also the first planned organize a state into 16 planning areas. I haven't distilled any of that information, but all of those documents are up there for council members to look at
Temple McKinnon: Any questions about that.
Temple McKinnon: Okay. Suzanne. You want to get into
Suzanne Schwartz: So I'm
Suzanne Schwartz: Just as a quick just sort of touch base on where we are on the meeting. We've got 25 minutes before we said we would end the meeting.
Suzanne Schwartz: We do need to leave some time at the end for a quorum of you to be present for any public comment. It doesn't look like will get a lot but
Suzanne Schwartz: I'm wondering if if we could go up to noon. If eight, if nine of you might be willing to stay for a few minutes just to make sure we capture any public comment that
Suzanne Schwartz: That we might get
Suzanne Schwartz: So, so we got 25 minutes we do need to spend some time at the end, talking about the next meeting. I think that's really important to know
Suzanne Schwartz: Get your input on what we want to do for the next meeting. So I'm going to try to stop us at about 10 till leaves us about 15 minutes to begin to talk about the
Suzanne Schwartz: Issue. Temple your slide went away.
Temple McKinnon: Need this slide. Whoops, sorry.
Suzanne Schwartz: And you were just and
Matt Nelson: I was gonna, I was sort of plan just throwing out there after just since you just heard about these tools that we developed and information out there.
Matt Nelson: One of the things we thought we just throw out there as one example of something you might consider it's really up to you all to move the ball forward based on what's already out there, something like acknowledging more explicitly in your plans that you received and looked at the
Matt Nelson: Technical memos from the surrounding regions and considered the needs that are in the surrounding regions.
Matt Nelson: Considered the surpluses and looked at this interactive map that shows you who has needs who might have surpluses, you know, is something like acknowledging that you looked at it, your consultants considered it look for ways of coordinating
Matt Nelson: And maybe you did or didn't find projects or strategies to take advantage of that. But maybe something like acknowledging explicitly in your plan and the group considering as an action item, something like
Matt Nelson: That information has been considered we action based on it. So we therefore, you know, have at least
Matt Nelson: Taken a little smaller step forward with this information is that, you know, that's the kind of thing. And maybe y'all think would be a good thing for planning groups to do because it's not explicit right now.
Matt Nelson: It's out there. The degree to which regions looked at it acted on. It is not necessarily explicit and clear. But that's something that you all could consider maybe that's something you want the planning groups to all do.
Matt Nelson: But that's up to you. But that's just something we think of is moving the ball forward, based on what you know on that information. For example,
Matt Nelson: So just want to throw that out the
Kelley Holcomb: Matt this is Kelley. I've got a question in that regard. I can hear our consultants already saying there's no money in the scope to do that. And that would be a pretty heavy lift.
Kelley Holcomb: To look at
Kelley Holcomb: Especially if you're talking all other 15 regions.
Matt Nelson: From what I know. Kelley. I think this actually I, my guess is the consultants would understand this is part of what they're doing anyway, already. I think, some are already doing this.
Matt Nelson: They're just doing it, different degrees. I think if you break this into the process early enough anyway. Yes, we definitely want to hear from folks and that's gonna be an issue, potentially for this group in general. While we're talking about it.
Matt Nelson: Ideas for additional work. I heard water quality early with the Kevin brought up.
Matt Nelson: If you want to do more Water Quality analysis that can get expensive.
Matt Nelson: So the degree to which it increases the workload is a factor for sure. Kelley. But I think this one. That one aspect.
Matt Nelson: Is already occurring. And that's how you coming up with these international projects already, but it's just what it is, but it may be acknowledging you a little more would be one step. That's all.
Kelley Holcomb: I mean, I agree that it's already occurring but it's primarily occurring with neighboring regions.
Matt Nelson: Right, yeah.
Kelley Holcomb: Reach out and touch a Region A or anything over here in East Texas.
Kelley Holcomb: Not a bad
Matt Nelson: A picture.
Kelley Holcomb: Not a bad idea.
Kevin Ward: Does the database only talk about existing water supplies?
Kevin Ward: Or does it address in the fifth year of arrives and what water supplies are being developed within the regions.
Matt Nelson: It includes strategies and availabilities from new, new supplies. So if you're going to build a new well field or a reservoir that data that availability number, not supply
Matt Nelson: Availability at the source that data goes into the database as part of the planning process and then the strategies and WUGS tap that source as a supply, but that all that data is in the database along the way. Just depends on the timing of when that data is there for everyone to see.
Temple McKinnon: And that tool I demonstrated only showed current side so that it was put out at a point in time when folks are developing strategies and there wasn't any strategy data. So that tool
Temple McKinnon: isn't to reflect strategies. It's to work with needs that have been identifying what do you can do about it.
Matt Nelson: Right. But what it sounds like is Kevin's talking about is maybe a tool like this that that also another layer that shows availability of new project strategy sources. Is that right, Kevin?
Kevin Ward: That's correct.
Kevin Ward: So,
Kevin Ward: But it's still going to miss some things only. For instance, if the region itself doesn't really have a need to develop a strategy.
Kevin Ward: To get that strategy is available to be developed and let's just, you know, we could pick
Kevin Ward: The Wright Patman
Kevin Ward: You know, if, if that was something that was that Region D didn't put in their plan.
Kevin Ward: And it wouldn't show up as an available water supply that Region C should consider, but we did consider it. I mean, even though that wasn't technically a water supply that was available. The additional amounts that that's come from that strategy.
Kevin Ward: So I just want to make sure we don't lose sight of the fact that if we don't have some kind of tool that looks like it looks at the basins themselves and determines what's
Kevin Ward: Currently available by development of additional water supply, through storage or off channel or whatever.
Kevin Ward: That you know it won't show up and then you won't have the longer term visionary aspects of these things. Same thing applies to groundwater, I can get to get into especially cross the midsection of the state. You got some really deep and some prolific
Kevin Ward: groundwater supplies, you know, the water, the bucket analysis that we did at one point.
Matt Nelson: That data is available.
Kevin Ward: But in the water plans, you're not showing that it's available if it's not developed.
Matt Nelson: Well, it's it is available in the database. Those availabilities we take directly from the the
Matt Nelson: The mag numbers directly go in the database. The full mag and so that that data is out there. And as you know,
Matt Nelson: The database that we those data that availability for groundwater is a set amount, based on the mag. So that is out and available database.
Matt Nelson: I've seen it directly, but that is there. So those numbers Kevin for groundwater there now. Yes, you know, surface waters trickier right.
Matt Nelson: Sorry.
Kevin Ward: A lot trickier.
Matt Nelson: Yeah, the surface water is just not everyone knows surface water that well, surface water availability is a little bit of a chicken and the egg thing.
Matt Nelson: You can create availability when you build a project.
Matt Nelson: Only available only available in a drought of is there every year. So it requires a project so
Matt Nelson: It's not. You can't just look at a river basin and say okay this is how much water is available very easily. It's project driven. So that's a, you can't predict that necessarily calling TCEQ, for example of them tell you how much water is available. They won't do that.
Kevin Ward: Okay, so you mentioned available groundwater. I thought the groundwater districts got to dictate to the regional planning areas, what they could use within their aquifers with their, their managing as far as available numbers in groundwater they they
Matt Nelson: They do this through the mag
Kevin Ward: Right. So as for instance if their Desired Future Condition is to only use 5% of the capacity and
Kevin Ward: They want to maintain whatever kind of flow because of it. No one's ever evaluated water past that point and you could end up with, you know, like, in one case, one of the aquifer systems
Kevin Ward: You've got 25 million acre feet per year of available yield within it. And yet you're showing in the water plan. It's got you know 200 thousand
Kevin Ward: So I just saying that those are the kinds of things that, you know, even if you never developed it as a current water supply, you need to look at
Kevin Ward: Going down the road, it's just a matter of where it's going and how deep they are.
Suzanne Schwartz: And I'm wondering is, is this. Um, I think these ideas are probably important and but I'm wondering if if we want to move forward we really only have like 15 minutes left to both
Suzanne Schwartz: Starting to talk about the subject matter more, you know, talk about you know framing this as a as an issue broadly and then discussing the next agenda. Would you all be willing to either to keep this discussion, either.
Kevin Ward: Yeah.
Suzanne Schwartz: That's pretty technical either offline or to the
Suzanne Schwartz: Briefing for the next meeting.
Kevin Ward: I'm okay with that. The only point I was trying to make it, we're kind of scratching the surface on some of this and things like right there for long term visionary on some of this.
Suzanne Schwartz: And maybe
Suzanne Schwartz: The Board could include included in the briefing for, you know, the next meeting. Would that be a way to handle that?
Kevin Ward: Of course, yeah, sure.
Steve Walthour: Okay, sure.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, so I want to kind of go where we had anticipated moving forward. And we really have very little time was to start
Suzanne Schwartz: Taking one of the topics that, the broader topics in enhancing interregional coordination and
Suzanne Schwartz: Having a brief discussion on what is the problem, having you brainstorm some ideas that we've already collected ideas from some of you.
Suzanne Schwartz: By email and then maybe thinking about brainstorming idea what the goal, what what goal, you might want when you're addressing this broader topic. If, what I'd like to do is maybe spend no more than
Suzanne Schwartz: A few minutes on each those, collect as many thoughts as we can. You can then send additional thoughts to me under those topics, if you want, and then we'll try to produce a draft problem statement and goal statement. It's
Suzanne Schwartz: We don't have as much time as I had hoped for that.
Suzanne Schwartz: For that exercise. So, let us see where we get on the prop maybe as we discuss the problem statement. The idea is we do we try to do some at least brief.
Suzanne Schwartz: statement of the problem in terms of, you know, what problems exist in terms of enhancing interregional coordination.
Suzanne Schwartz: Ultimately develop a goal, how you're going to analyze solutions and then really have a discussion about the problem in more depth and then try to brainstorm some solutions.
Suzanne Schwartz: That's over that the latter parts will be over another meeting. So the idea is that we gather some information now. We we kind of tried to
Suzanne Schwartz: Work on it, you can give us some feedback, even before we get a statement out and then we get something out for you to consider at the next meeting. I'd like to see how far we can get on that.
Suzanne Schwartz: In the next few minutes at least start maybe the on the problem statement and then we've got to have a few minutes to resolve.
Suzanne Schwartz: To talk about next, the next agenda because it's we have to post that on. I think it's on Tuesday, so
Suzanne Schwartz: If that's acceptable to y'all, I'm going to go ahead and move. We've got it, we've produced
Suzanne Schwartz: I've got a document that Temple can put up on the screen.
Suzanne Schwartz: You know, you still got the slide up
Suzanne Schwartz: Yeah, there it is. So this is we're talking about enhancing interregional coordination, I kind of paraphrased as how can you work better together as regions.
Suzanne Schwartz: We had identified initially three you are you had identified at the last meeting three three specific issues you thought dealt with that. I think we've added to that today.
Suzanne Schwartz: But what I'd like to get to is kind of the thinking about what is the problem. What do you need to solve here.
Suzanne Schwartz: But that way we can ultimately get into a discussion of, you know, what's your goal and and you know how are you going to solve this, whatever the problem may exist related to it to enhancing interregional coordination or the way you coordinate together.
Suzanne Schwartz: The you've got there's some bullets there under what needs to be solved under the problem that I received via email I and
Suzanne Schwartz: I just take a few minutes to look at those. And what I'd like to do, maybe is just have you guys start to add to that list, we can try to populate the list a little more. And then after this meeting, we can produce perhaps a problem statement that you will be trying to solve.
Melanie Barnes: Did we have this list ahead of time Suzanne? Did I miss something?
Suzanne Schwartz: No, you did not have this ahead of time. I got a lot of these at the end of the day yesterday. So you did not
Suzanne Schwartz: So these are just some of the ideas you all had. Are there any other ideas things y'all would like to add to the idea of you know what what kind of problem. And this is something to spend just a couple minutes talking about it, you know, either a specific idea or, you know, a little discussion.
Steve Walthour: Should there be a an item under what needs to be solved some sort of prioritization
Steve Walthour: Guidelines on
Steve Walthour: You know, a conflict between maybe two regions, one region has set up to build a project using the same kind of water that somebody else is, should there be some sort of measure like who, you know, first come, first come first serve. Or, you know, how many people or units
Steve Walthour: The regions that are going to serve. So it should be. Should it be a prioritization?
Steve Walthour: Or is it already in here?
Suzanne Schwartz: Steve, is that would you call that something under the enhancing coordination or is that a resolution to the interregional conflict?
Steve Walthour: Well, I can just tell you that you have made this so small that I can barely read it on
Steve Walthour: my screen.
Steve Walthour: But I understand. Yeah, I have a little screen today.
Steve Walthour: Okay. That would be fine. Leave it there. Now I can see it. Thanks.
Steve Walthour: Sorry, guys. I'm blind.
Kelley Holcomb: You're not the only one. Steve, trust me.
Mark Evans: Suzanne, I believe the
Mark Evans: In the first bullet point
Mark Evans: The third sentence should be removed.
Suzanne Schwartz: The third is, the third bullet. I'm sorry.
Mark Evans: First bullet point. Third sentence.
Suzanne Schwartz: Third sentence. Remove that
Mark Evans: Yeah, I don't
Mark Evans: think you can make state statement.
Suzanne Schwartz: This was just some information. I had had, you know, they had been sent by brainstorming. I
Suzanne Schwartz: am happy to remove that. But it was somebody sense of a of the problem but
Kelley Holcomb: Suzanne, this is Kelley. Second bullet point liaisons need more guidance to identify and problem solve interregional conflicts, that's not their role to problem solve, is it I thought the liaisons job was to be a point of contact, a point of information, a communication point
Kelley Holcomb: More so than
Kelley Holcomb: What that
Kelley Holcomb: Looks like it's intended to be
Melanie Barnes: Kelley, I noticed with our liaison. They've just report what's happening that the region's having a meeting, they're going along, just like we are in there and maybe we just don't have those regional complex, which is why we don't see that at our Region O.
Melanie Barnes: So it's do when I went down to another region. It was barely acknowledged
Melanie Barnes: That there were, it was anybody there from another region. And so it's like there's no guidelines for those liaisons as to what your role is
It's
Kelley Holcomb: It's intended, Melanie was be to clarify when you actually have guidelines what those roles are
Kelley Holcomb: Can't be that they would problem solve, they may assist with but those liaisons don't have that ability.
Temple McKinnon: Should we clarify this statement then?
Mark Evans: And I agree with Kelley on that.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay.
Suzanne Schwartz: I think Temple will add some clarification to that and I'm, I'm, I know I just gotten started on this. Do you all
Suzanne Schwartz: Again, we're just trying to lay out what kind of
Melanie Barnes: Theme of what their role was, yeah.
Suzanne Schwartz: Yeah, and and on the whole issue of the, what are we trying to solve. Would it be
Suzanne Schwartz: It
Suzanne Schwartz: Would it be because I need to. I want to respect the time limit on the
Suzanne Schwartz: Of this agenda. Is it helpful for you all to if we get, you know,
Suzanne Schwartz: To take
Suzanne Schwartz: To get me some more issues about what do you see the problem, if other at what problems do you see right now, relative to, you know, interregional coordination we'll then draft a problem statement for you for next time.
Kelley Holcomb: Suzanne, this is Kelley again. Personally, I'd like to see the lot. The Word document. So I could go into track change mode and
Kelley Holcomb: Play with it. I mean,
Kelley Holcomb: Okay, we can spend an hour talking about the nuances of some of these things.
Suzanne Schwartz: Right.
Steve Walthour: I totally agree with Kelley.
Russell Schreiber: I agree.
Suzanne Schwartz: We can we can send that out after the meeting. And just as an FYI.
Suzanne Schwartz: Ultimately, a problem statement will probably be fairly broad but I agree that, you know, I understand that you know nuance is important so we'll send these this out for you with this.
Suzanne Schwartz: On this and let you take a crack at it and give us more influence. I see David has something that he wants to say
David Wheelock: Yeah, thanks Suzanne, and Mark, I appreciate your comment and that the sentence that was struck I'm their origin of it.
David Wheelock: And I certainly didn't mean to cast that statement on every regional planning group member across the state. I just want to make the comment that that statement is true in my, in my planning region.
David Wheelock: In some cases, so I wanted to capture the thought that maybe, maybe we need to rephrase it. The regional planning group members do do need to be knowledgeable
David Wheelock: On adjacent areas. And that's a really kind of want a second where Matt was going and Temple along those tools and information tools. Some of those I didn't know existed and um
David Wheelock: I think the idea of having the consultants be sure that they are someone like that make information known to the planning group members is probably a pretty good idea
Russell Schreiber: I agree to that, David. I had the same problem here.
Suzanne Schwartz: Thank you. Thank you all.
Suzanne Schwartz: Right. We'll move forward with this doing asking you to do some work before the next meeting. Let's take that. Let's go ahead and go to the next agenda and make sure we're going to
Suzanne Schwartz: Get where you want to be for the next agenda, we got, Temple's got a slide with the draft agenda on it, again pretty broad.
Suzanne Schwartz: You know, again, we would always
Suzanne Schwartz: Start with
Suzanne Schwartz: With public comment and meeting minutes.
Suzanne Schwartz: Topically we thought we would, and again, I think we'll have a lot less
Suzanne Schwartz: Housekeeping kind of planning, like we did at this meeting, but working through the two next topics of enhancing interregional coordination and
Suzanne Schwartz: Planning water resources for the state as a whole, I think we should be able to get some pretty good chunks of discussion on that and
Suzanne Schwartz: Especially if if we can get information from you before the meeting, for instance, about what where you see problems. What you think we ought to be aiming for, in terms of just a broad goal, you know, what would it look like if if this happened. We can probably jump start those discussions.
Suzanne Schwartz: So I'm assuming. Are those two topics, the ones that we should work on for the next meeting?
Steve Walthour: Yes.
Kevin Ward: Yes.
Suzanne Schwartz: I'm not hearing any objection. So we'll
Suzanne Schwartz: Plan to do that.
Suzanne Schwartz: Is there anything, we will, the other thing on this is if you
Suzanne Schwartz: Feel there's additional back, we've got background material posted. Temple's gone over some of this, if there are isn't we'd like to talk about what additional materials you will need for this meeting. Is there anything that would help you
Suzanne Schwartz: With your discussion of this meeting of those topics.
Suzanne Schwartz: And you can send a request to us for that. So it doesn't have to be identified today, but I want you to, do think about what, if any, additional material you need so that we can have a, you know, you've got the material that will
Suzanne Schwartz: Will be a good orientation. Do you need things presented to you, you know, in a presentation at the next meeting? Do you just need some more
Suzanne Schwartz: background material? So send, send me an email. Send Temple snd I am email if you've got anything specific you would like. Are there, is there anything missing from
Suzanne Schwartz: this agenda?
Tomas Rodriguez: Suzanne.
Tomas Rodriguez: And there's nothing missing. The only thing I'm going to ask is,
Tomas Rodriguez: The font that you using for this June 10 agenda.
Tomas Rodriguez: Yes, that is perfect to read. So whenever you have anything to show it at that font it would be perfect.
Tomas Rodriguez: Thank you.
Suzanne Schwartz: Appreciate that input. Thank you.
Matt Nelson: Yeah size of font
Matt Nelson: Not the style. Right.
Kevin Ward: Yeah, I wish we had the ability to have a chat room with this or something like that, where we can type comments in that way. We don't have to interrupt anyone, we would be just put something down before you lose a thought like you do with WebEx.
Suzanne Schwartz: Right, we Vicki can chime in about that, we may, I mean I think we can enable chat. But it let's anybody who's tuning in
Suzanne Schwartz: Participate and we also wondered about whether that would be a problem with Open Meetings Act if it creates a sidebar conversation. There was, we had some concern about that. So we've disabled that idea.
Suzanne Schwartz: We
Suzanne Schwartz: If you all would like that we can look at that some more.
Mark Evans: The open meetings could be an issue there. I would think it would be.
Suzanne Schwartz: Yeah, that's the primary reason we were hesitant to do it. We just don't want to run afoul of having sidebar conversations that we, you know, they can't occur.
Kevin Ward: I just didn't know if the public
Kevin Ward: If they can see it, it shouldn't be a violation.
Mark Evans: That's probably true if the public can see, maybe
Suzanne Schwartz: We could look at that and
Suzanne Schwartz: Do most
Suzanne Schwartz: would most of you like that option?
Tomas Rodriguez: Yes.
Tomas Rodriguez: Tomas. Yes.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, well, we'll look into that and see
Suzanne Schwartz: We can certainly experiment with that.
Matt Nelson: Especially if it's recorded
Suzanne Schwartz: Yeah, we'll check and see what legal says about that and maybe see if we can do it in a way that we were confident about open meetings.
Suzanne Schwartz: Um,
Suzanne Schwartz: I guess then
Suzanne Schwartz: Let me know background material, both for the next two items and any of the other two topics that we're going to be considering, and then we will
Suzanne Schwartz: Will be we have to post this agenda by Tuesday we will we will go ahead and get it out pretty substantially in this form.
Suzanne Schwartz: And we will be getting getting some immediate information for you to with a request to get it back to us quickly on on ideas about problems, how we frame a problem for for both of these two topics.
Suzanne Schwartz: And and then we'll get something back to you that will discuss it at the next meeting. Is there anything else that would help you for the next meeting, and which, which is
Suzanne Schwartz: June.
Suzanne Schwartz: 10. Yes. And I believe that's at 1, I forgot to put I meant to put the times on on that document, but I believe it's at 1.
Suzanne Schwartz: And it's a two hour meeting. We have one four hour meeting, which is on June 22
Kelley Holcomb: I do have a question. Can you all send out calendar invites for everything that's gone through the doodle poll process so that we can, I guess I can add it myself. Never mind. I'll do it myself.
Suzanne Schwartz: Temple, I'm not sure I'm understanding what you're saying you
Temple McKinnon: You want me to send you appointments
Temple McKinnon: Of the meeting.
Kelley Holcomb: Right, yeah.
Melanie Barnes: Yes, please. Kelley Holcomb: And outlook guys it's calendar invites but
Suzanne Schwartz: Yeah, okay.
Suzanne Schwartz: Anything else that that we ought to talk about just moving forward.
Suzanne Schwartz: For the next meeting.
Kelley Holcomb: I do have one question for everybody to ponder. It's not necessarily something needs to be discussed. We've got these four
Kelley Holcomb: Topics, four
Kelley Holcomb: Four issue topics we're talking about. Are we walking through these on some sort of logistical order so that we're solving problem one before we're trying to solve problem two?
Kelley Holcomb: Maybe yes, I don't know. I'm just asking a question.
Suzanne Schwartz: Yes and no. Part, part of the reason to put enhancing interregional coordination first was, we thought it would probably be a an easier topic to handle.
Suzanne Schwartz: Just to let you guys you know it's something you can get your hands around a little easier. And so that's quite frankly, the reason it is first, but if you prefer a different order to these we can put them in a different order.
Kelley Holcomb: I don't know that I have a preference at this point, but I just don't want to double back and have to cover the same territory over and over again.
Suzanne Schwartz: Right. Kelley Holcomb: to answer a slightly different question.
Suzanne Schwartz: Yeah, I think, Kelley when I looked at it. There are definitely I think there's potential for these things to kind of
Suzanne Schwartz: Some of the discussions will be may bleed into the other things. And so if you if that happens, I think we need to make sure we note that for future discussion so that we don't have, you know,
Suzanne Schwartz: You all please let me know if there's things we you know either. We're doing in the wrong place. This is your process. If you've got suggestions for either the order or how we rearrange anything, let me know.
Kelley Holcomb: Last question. The revised issues list. You're going to send that out to us.
Kelley Holcomb: Soon, when you send the Word document so that we can look at that as well?
Suzanne Schwartz: Yes.
Kelley Holcomb: Thank you.
Kevin Ward: Are we, I mean with the issues that we got here.
Kevin Ward: Are we restricted and
Kevin Ward: Then, you know, evaluating
Kevin Ward: The current way that you can have or declare or define an interregional conflict?
Kevin Ward: But to, you know, who's required to do what, it seems like the
Kevin Ward: The onus is upon the region, one region to prove there's not an interregional conflict, a lot less than there is a region to prove that there is.
Kevin Ward: And not so sure that, you know, that future litigation is not gonna change things. The state never appealed the court case and we never got it up to the Supreme Court, which would have been very good.
Suzanne Schwartz: So Kevin Is that something you'd like us to discuss when we get to interregional conflict?
Kevin Ward: Yeah, when we get to interregional conflict I think we just need to discuss carefully.
Kevin Ward: This group would feel would be appropriate, and what the requirements are for
Kevin Ward: That
Kevin Ward: I sent earlier information on, I'm unclear as to why they're different standards for these interregional
Kevin Ward: Projects as far as what documentation needs to be in a water plan compared to the strategies that that aren't controversial
Kevin Ward: elsewise in the water plan. You can have a drain project that you just through on paper to meet them to fill a hole.
Kevin Ward: And as long as it doesn't produce a conflict, you don't have to put anything out there on it. But if you've got something that looks like it might even be controversial with another region, man, you just got to about go
Kevin Ward: So I think those kind of things that there may be useful, at least to provide comment back to the legislature, the Water Board on so that they understand what we're dealing with out here.
Suzanne Schwartz: But we'll try to get that reflected in when we get to that discussion. And you know, I also welcome any of you who have
Suzanne Schwartz: Thoughts about how to structure a particular topic I you know one thought I have is, I know there's a
Suzanne Schwartz: Conflict, there's been a conflict issues relating to C and D, not necessarily a current conflict identified, but I'm thinking you two might be really good to help us think through what that meeting looks like.
Suzanne Schwartz: So I'm always welcome people inputting on the, you know, agendas moving forward and
Suzanne Schwartz: You know how we approach it. But with that, if y'all. If it's okay with you. We've still got a quorum of people, I'd like to move to public comment and let you all go if that's okay.
Steve Walthour: Sure.
Suzanne Schwartz: All right. I like that. Thumbs up, Kelley.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay. So is there anyone who's here and wishing to make public comment.
Suzanne Schwartz: If you do, you could raise your hand on
Suzanne Schwartz: On your screen. If you're on the screen or press star nine if you'd like to comment and then Vicki Read will be checking to see if there are any any public commenters. Vicki?
Vicki Read: I don't see anyone, but I can unmute everyone in case I'm just missing something if you'd like.
Suzanne Schwartz: That'd be great.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay. Is anybody, anybody there who would like to make a public comment at this time.
Suzanne Schwartz: You'll need to unmute your own microphone if you do
Suzanne Schwartz: I think Vicki's giving you the ability to do that but you'll need to unmute if you want to want to make a comment.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, I'm not hearing any anyone wishing to address the council. So at this time we will. Um, I guess we'll adjourn the meeting.
Suzanne Schwartz: Thank you all. Thank you.
Kelley Holcomb: Have a nice day.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay, we'll be in touch very soon.
Suzanne Schwartz: Okay.
Suzanne Schwartz: Everyone okay bye bye