A Message from Mary Suhm Concerning Dallas's Role as Region's "Emergency Water Provider"

DallasWaterReservoirsNovember102011.JPG
So much for all that rain we were promised; there it goes, not even close save for last night's stray raindrops. The not-even-near-miss seems only fitting in advance of tomorrow's briefing before the Dallas City Council, when City Manager Mary Suhm will recommend going to Stage 1, twice-a-week watering restrictions on December 12. It would not be surprising, though, if Scott Griggs asks why we're not at Stage 2 at this late date.

Speaking of: City Hall just posted its November newsletter, in which Suhm explains to the citizenry the need to cut back on watering. An excerpt, in response to some of the Friends' questions over the weekend:
Despite the fact that our water supply reservoirs -- Lake Fork, Grapevine, Lewisville, Ray Hubbard, Ray Roberts and Tawakoni -- are less than 25 percent depleted, other factors make it prudent that we begin water restrictions before the lakes are depleted further.

Construction at the DWU Eastside Treatment Plan will temporarily reduce treatment capacity, another factor addressed in the City's Drought Contingency Plan (DCP). Another factor: other entities water supplies in the area have been impacted greater than Dallas, creating water supply emergencies in the region. That is why I have recommended to the City Council that we initiate Stage 1 water restrictions on Dec. 12. ...

Through successful planning, substantial conservation efforts by Dallas residents and meteorological good fortune, we have more water available than others in the region. And although Dallas did not plan to be the emergency water provider for North Texas, our neighbors are in a water crisis, and providing emergency water is the right thing to do.
Read the whole thing here.
My Voice Nation Help
23 comments
WW
WW

CORRECTION : It's  at 49%..( I was looking at the data before the automatic sprinklers come on )

Bob
Bob

No. No. No. Selling water to neighboring municipalities is a horrible idea.  These are the people who will stop at NOTHING to steal high-value residential and business development from Dallas while shutting out lower income folks because they don't want "those kinds"of people besmirching their pristine gated communities.  They refuse to accomodate public housing, they refuse to pay their share of the amenities that the City of Dallas provides to the entire region, they refuse to shoulder their portion of indigent health care, and they act like spoiled children when Dallas dares to assert itself as the economic driver of the region.

Most of these suburbs formed and grew because they wanted to take advantage of the benefits that the City of Dallas afforded them all through the 20th Century, without having to bear the tax burden and other costs of these services.  When the Great Water Shortage proves to them that they cannot sustain themselves without Dallas, perhaps the freeloaders will see the light and catch up with their regional responsibilites.  Right now they are pretty much parasites, feeding off Dallas without paying their fair share.

When they get thirsty enough, when they get gridlocked enough, when they get fracked enough, maybe they will become better neighbors.  Until then, shut the water tap off and keep building those toll roads.

East Dallas
East Dallas

Iagree that it is the right thing to do at this stage of the drought... but itshould be sold to them at a price that would insure that it is used sparinglyand compensates Dallas for it’s foresight and investment in infrastructure.

 

However,if the drought goes on and we move to a more restrictive stage in Dallas thenproviding water to other cities should be limited to water trucks for drinkingwater only.  Dallas should not imperil it’sown drinking water supply for those who did not plan.

Wylie H.
Wylie H.

So, what Mary Suhm is effectively saying is that the City of Dallas has spent (is spending) hundreds of millions of dollars to act as the emergency back-up water provider for the North Texas region without asking for or receiving any reimbursement from the cost of building this infrastructure from other jurisdictions.

If the City of Dallas is going to act as the drought contingency plan for other jurisdictions, it seems only reasonable to ask them to share the cost of the infrastructure... no?

Take a worst case scenario, the City helps out the other cities during this time of need.... and the drought continues.  The continuing drought, plus demands placed on the City by helping other jurisdictions "because it is the right thing to do" then results in the City becoming prematurely exposed to emergency conditions.  Then, who helps the City of Dallas "because it is the right thing to do?"  My understanding under Ms. Suhm's plan is that we will then be up the creek without a paddle... not that it would matter, because the creek itself will be dry.

scottindallas
scottindallas

No Wylie, the city sells the water, as a profit.  I'm sure you can find all the information.

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin

On the bright side Wylie, if the drought continues and the creeks and rivers are dry, we dont have to worry about the levees failing!!!!

Mountain Creek
Mountain Creek

Who's gonna be our Emergency Water Sucker Upper if/when the levees fail?

scottindallas
scottindallas

Man, think about how much water we'll have to sell then!

Montemalone
Montemalone

We should BAN automatic sprinklers.Then the landscapers that program them to run for 2 hours a day so they have grass to cut.And BAN UNDER PENALTY OF DEATH the fucking blowers.I almost hit some dipshit who was standing in the middle of the street, blowing leaves to the other side (shortly to be blown back) while not paying afuckingtention.No sprinklers, no grass, no blowers.Life is good.

scottindallas
scottindallas

all that grass and those trees that give needed sustenance cool the city and clean the air.  Somehow I suspect that you would protest the litter and leaves that would accumulate without those blowers.  They are far easier and more effective than sweeping, so more manpower will have to be paid to sweep up the litter and dust that inevitably accumulates on all flat spaces.

Montemalone
Montemalone

I said nothing about trees.Matter of fact, we cut too many down in the name of development.

The pollution caused by mowers, blowers, edgers, fertilizers, and the trucks that haul that shit around is far more damaging to the environment than the transpiration that occurs.A broom and a rake would do the job with no pollution, no noise, and lower cost.

matilda of tuscany
matilda of tuscany

My husband and I do our yard--I am unhappy with our neighbors and all their yard crews, which impacts the environment on so many levels.

There are good services, but at least 75% are not, based on my observation.  time to educate the homeowners on small changes they can make, starting with getting rid of the abusers taking advantage of them and Mother Nature.

Lawn clippings aren't dangerous, they just need to be used on site, rather than transported.

scottindallas
scottindallas

I use the blower to blow the leaves into the lawn that I then mow/mulch into the yard.  I don't scalp the yard and don't throw leaves away.  However, you overstate the problem with taking plant waste to the landfill, the landfill imports tons of mulch per day to incorporate with the trash, so, how are lawn clipping suddenly so dangerous?  A lot of extreme positions here.

I apply Organic fertilizer, recycle, don't blow waste into the street and hire only Americans.  If you're so unhappy with your lawn service, I'm looking to add a half dozen maintenance contracts.  I also prune and trim the shrubs with hand shears, as that gives a cleaner, more careful cut than powershears.  I've debated using a push mower and other non-powered tools, though I'd have to charge a premium to off-set the increased labor costs. 

matilda of tuscany
matilda of tuscany

All those leaves should be mulch mowed into the turf as natural food for the soil ecosystem.  Excess should be composted on site or taken to the nearest community garden for composting.  Bagging and sending leaves to the landfill (usually 20-50 miles from the home) is a crime against Nature...as are gas blowers. 

What I see are companies scalping the turf, bagging the leaves, setting automatic sprinklers to overwater (or telling the homeowner they need to)--which in turn makes the homeowner call the pest control people to come spray poison to kill the mosquitoes, and then blowing everything into my yard with a polluting blower.

Mow companies are ripe for some City policies, if not a revolution.

Bob
Bob

Yes, it is exceedingly productive to use a gas-guzzling machine to blow your trash into the street or some else's yard, rather than to sweep it up and dispose of it properly.  That's the best way--to push your trash problem off onto someone else.  We do it with lawn debris, and we do it with human debris.

scottindallas
scottindallas

the cost is higher as a broom is not as effective.  You think all these landscapers are so stupid they buy expensive blowers without getting more productivity?

lorlee
lorlee

I certainly hope we aren't entertaining any request from Cities who are fracking.  That process is so water intensive that it should be reconsidered on that basis alone. 

Darrd2010
Darrd2010

oh baby, they've BEEN selling water to those other communities already.They very briefly admitted it a while back. But very quick and low key. I'm waiting for someone to repeat what they said. Whores, all of them.

Paul
Paul

Don't forget the water in Toledo Bend ...

I guess that we could send a few tankers of drinking water to some neighborhoods so that people in the NTMWD can fill up a few gallon jugs for drinking and cooking water.

scottindallas
scottindallas

Ahah!  Finally, being the behemoth pays off for Dallas.  We've treated your indigent at Parkland, we've had you drive over our streets, even while you hide in other tax districts.  Your White Flight has finally caught up with you Icarus.  Those wax wings sure get frail in the hot dry Summer.  And, who has the water you need for coolin', baby, I'm not fooling.  Big Wet D. 

Back to Reality
Back to Reality

if you dont want to pay for indigents at the COUNTY hospital, and dont want suburbanites driving on your public streets move to a small town in the country otherwise stfu and deal with it.  And dont blame whitey for the indigents, most of those are illegals or dare I say homeless blacks.  enjoy your water scott, someday you will drown in it when your levees fail because your silly city government is too stupud

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...