Author Archive

Contact Information:
(817)596-8100

AUSTIN – State Representative Phil King (R-Weatherford) has coauthored legislation that, if approved, would mandate a two year moratorium on the Trans Texas Corridor project.

“Transparency and public participation have been critical issues throughout this toll road process,” stated King. “Providing for a two year moratorium on the toll project will further this goal by allowing for greater public involvement as well as increased legislative oversight.”

The bill, in addition to staying the Trans Texas Corridor project for two years, would also create a legislative study committee comprised of members from the House, Senate and Governor’s office. The committee would be charged with conducting public hearings and evaluating the public policy implications of allowing a private entity to operate and collect revenue from a toll project.

“The implications surrounding the construction of toll roads in Texas are too great to not be completely and adequately reviewed,” King said. “Allowing the legislature to study the current proposals and consider alternatives to building toll roads are in the best interests of the citizens of this state.”

Wise County Messenger

By Skip Nichols

State Rep. Phil King (R-Weatherford) has three bills that he intends to file on a groundwater protection district that would include Wise County, he said Friday in a telephone interview.

King said one of the three bills would put a five-county district – including Wise, Parker, Montague, Hood and Somervell counties – up for a vote in November. Another bill would include only Wise and Parker counties and the final bill would be just for Wise County.

“We’re trying to reach a consensus among community leaders,” said King as he drove home from Austin through Waco just after noon. “I’m very strongly leaning toward the five-county district. But we want to have all ready if needed.”

King said he’s been talking extensively with Wise County Commissioner Kevin Burns about the groundwater district.

The county has made the district a legislative imperative since it learned a draft study by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality named Wise County as a priority groundwater management area. That designation triggers a two-year window to set up a groundwater district otherwise the state places the county in a much larger district.

King and other state officials have said that Wise County would likely become a part of a 13-county district, where the political and geologic differences are vast. Such a district would be funded from taxes.

A potential problem to the five-county district surfaced when it was learned that Rep. Charlie Geren (R-Fort Worth) was writing legislation for a six- or seven-county district to include Tarrant County.

“There’s merit both ways,” said King, talking about Geren’s proposed legislation or his bill for a five-county district. “He asked if I minded if he met with the local leaders to discuss his bill. I said that was fine. In fact, the decision needs to be made by the local communities.”

Wise County Judge Bill McElhaney said that he will meet with Geren and other county judges, including Tarrant County Judge Glen Whitley, next Friday (Feb. 9) in Parker County to discuss the groundwater district.

McElhaney said that Geren told him by phone Thursday that Tarrant County needs to be a part of the district because “rural counties will do a better job of conserving the groundwater.”

One concern among local leaders is whether the district’s governing board would be weighted by population or if each county would be represented equally. If population is used, none of Wise County’s leaders are interested because Tarrant County would dominate the board, they said.

Other legislation

King also said he’s filed several other bills that should interest Wise County residents.

One involves notification of property owners by oil and gas companies of their intention to drill.

“It would require written notification to all property owners,” King said. “Most good companies do that anyway. But, there are some who just come on the property and start bulldozing a road and building pads.”

King said the bill was prompted by the numerous complaints he’s received from property owners.

King admitted that the oil and gas lobby is not happy with the bill. Still, he said, he believes common sense will prevail and that a certified letter is simply “common courtesy.”

Another piece of legislation King has filed could bring added taxes to Wise County.

It requires drilling rigs to be taxed in the county where they are being used. Currently, King said, most rigs are based out of Midland or Houston and those counties get the property tax revenue.

King said it’s not unusual for a rig to be in Wise County for all 12 months – and “that’s where it should be taxed,” he noted. Rig owners would rather pay Wise County taxes anyway, he said, because it would save them money.

Wise County Messenger

By Skip Nichols

Wise County commissioners made a major commitment Tuesday for a groundwater protection district.

Commissioners and Judge Bill McElhaney unanimously approved a memorandum supporting legislation in the current session to form a district with Parker, Hood and Montague counties.

Precinct 2 Commissioner Kevin Burns said time is of the essence, since the Legislature kicked off its session last week.

“The timeline is tough,” said Burns who with Precinct 1 Commissioner Robert Rankin and public works director Tom Goode went to Austin last week to visit with Brian Sledge, an attorney who specializes in groundwater districts. Sledge was part of a workshop on groundwater districts in Decatur, which was coordinated by Rep. Phil King (R-Weatherford).

Burns said the group had gone to Austin with the intention of seeking advice for forming a single-county district in light of a declaration by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. That declaration said Wise – along with several other North Texas counties – were priority groundwater management areas.

That designation triggers a two-year window for the county to set up a groundwater district or simply let the state place the county in a district.

King and other state officials said that Wise County would likely become a part of a 13-county district, where the political and geologic differences are vast. Such a district would be funded from taxes.

If Wise County is able to convince Parker, Hood and Montague counties to join it, there would be more local control, said Burns and Rankin. Perhaps most important, voters would get to have a say in the district – including whether it would be funded by fees or taxes.

Burns said he has gotten favorable responses from a couple of Parker County commissioners and Hood County Judge Andy Rash. Goode said Montague County officials, including city of Bowie officials, expressed interest in the district.

“A multi-county district would provide some economy of scale, especially for the taxpayer,” Burns said.

“We have to get people on board (by Jan. 30),” Rankin said. “If we can’t, then we need to proceed with a single-county district.”

King and state Sen. Craig Estes (R-Wichita Falls) have vowed to carry the Wise County legislation this session.

Wise County’s designation as a priority groundwater management area by TCEQ came after an extensive study of aquifers in the North Texas area, including the Trinity Aquifer.

The study noted that “millions of gallons of water are used in the drilling of wells and the stimulation of fractures in the Barnett Shale. … This water demand is not anticipated to decrease over the 30-year planning horizon. … Shortages are projected for Wise.

“More groundwater is being withdrawn than recharged to aquifers. At present, water user groups in Wise are collectively using the Trinity aquifer at quantities over … estimates for safe supply. The past and continued over development of aquifers from the continued urbanization of the area threatens water supplies for rural domestic, municipal and small water providers who depend on groundwater sources.”

In making Wise County a priority groundwater management area, the study concluded that protecting existing groundwater supplies is a critical issue … because the delivery of alternative surface water supplies is not projected to be economically feasible.”