Laserfiche WebLink
<br />LA PORTE AREA WATER AUTHORITY <br /> <br />MINUTES <br />DECEMBER 17, 1986 <br /> <br />1. The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. <br /> <br />MEMBERS PRESENT: President Cary Burnley, Vice President Al <br />Fields, Member Jerry Bramlett. <br /> <br />MEMBERS ABSENT: Secretary Rick Matthews. <br /> <br />OTHERS PRESENT: Mayor Norman Malone, City Manager Bob Herrera, <br />Authority Attorney John Armstrong, Director of Public Works Steve <br />Gillett, Water/Wastewater Superintendent Buddy Jacobs, Cecil Allen <br />and Neil Bishop of Turner, Collie & Braden, and George Basham of <br />Lloyd, Gosselink, Fowler & Ryan. <br /> <br />2. This item tabled due to copies not being mailed. <br /> <br />3. George Basham was introduced and he began by reiterating the <br />firm's assignment and although they were not finished, he could <br />bring the Board up to date on their findings. They were still <br />looking into the water rights of the City of Houston and their <br />water needs. There is a validity to the Authority's concern over <br />a ten (10) year raw water contract in that the Southeast Plant <br />shows evidence of enough water but action with the City of Houston <br />would be time consuming. George stated that in all likelihood the <br />Texas Water Commission would determine a ten (10) year contract <br />would not be an appropriate restriction especially since the <br />Authority is a public entity. He will have a written opinion to <br />the Board the week of December 22, 1986. <br /> <br />4. Bob Herrera passed out a draft of a letter to be sent to the <br />entities asking for a written response as to whether or not they <br />are still going to be involved with the La Porte Area Water <br />Authority. This letter will be hand carried to each entity by <br />Steve Gillett and he will explain to them the Board's actions. <br /> <br />Neil Bishop stated that there had been a question as to whether or <br />not the 10% peaking capability from ground water would be <br />sufficient. Using data from the past three (3) years Neil Bishop <br />and Cecil Allen agreed that 10% would be sufficient. Neil also <br />said that they used the current average plus 30% to determine <br />water needs but that 30% may be too high. A decision needs to be <br />made on projected growth rates as the estimate of water usage will <br />affect rates. <br />