2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

L Iii. 9i Regular City Council Meeting January 14, 2008 Page 3 not have any impact on un- permitted water, because he did not think there was un- permitted water. With regard to an impact of entering into an Agreement on the State reallocation of permitted water, Mr. Mathews said he did not believe it would have a significant impact. He said the State did have the right to cancel water rights if there had been ten years of non use. Mr. Mathews stated there were exceptions that had been added to the cancellation provisions of the Water Code that expressly except from cancellation of water rights that are permitted through a reservoir and that is funded in part by the permit water. He went on to say the City of Paris had a water right in Pat Mayse that is predicated on the Corp of Engineer Contract, because the City paid a portion of the construction costs of the reservoir. Mr. Mathews informed Council he was not overly concerned about a cancellation of the City's water rights. Council Member Wilson said he understood there was a tremendous amount of water going over the spillway. He further said the outflow tube was at 451 and in the year 2001 an average amount of 151 million gallons a day of water went over the spillway. Council Member Wilson suggested raising the conservation pool three or four feet, and not raising the dam. He said it would his understanding there was anyone down stream and that all Irving was asking for was four feet. Mr. Mathews said if the premises were correct, that from a water rights standpoint it was a matter of going through the notice and amending the permit. He also said TCEQ could be difficult at times. Council Member Strathern said the engineer he spoke to said if they raise it, they would be flooding more land. He said he thought they were in too big of a hurry entering into the MOU and that he would rather the City of Paris come up with the money to pay for the study. He went on to say they had received information that he did not believe was correct. Council Member Brown said he did not understand why they needed to delay it, because they were just trying to get the engineer studies started. Mr. Mathews confirmed the MOU did not commit the City of Paris to sign a contract with the City of Irving at the end of the day. It commits the City of Paris to direct staff to develop a contract that would be brought back to the them and to the Irving City Council, and if both parties decide it is a good deal for them they could go forward. He said he was not there to sell them on the MOU, but to give his assessment of legal issues associated with the MOU. Mayor Freelen stated Council had discussed this item with the attorney, received advice from the attorney and it was time to decide whether or not Council wanted to take any action. A Motion to enter into the MOU with the City of Irving was made by Council Member Biard and seconded by Council Member Brown. Mayor Freelen asked if there was any discussion. Council Member Biard and Council Member Fisher said they wanted discussion. Council Member Biard said he wanted to make it clear they were just entering into the MOU to study the feasibility. He said that no one knew if there was water available that could be sold to the City of