Mount Pleasant Daily Tribune
SRBA GROUP DRAWS MORE FIRE ON MARVIN NICHOLS RESERVOIR
By Clarissa Cutrell, Tribune Staff Writer, 26 June 2002

"I don't understand, why is this motion even being entertained?" asked John McConnell about the controversial Marvin Nichols Reservoir being considered by the Sulphur River Basin Authority (SRBA) at their Tuesday board meeting.

With the prospect of losing land to the 60,000 to 70,000 acre lake bottom and subsequent mitigation, his question echoed what many local farmers, ranchers and landowners have been asking since the possibility of the lake's construction first surfaced.

The issue was raised afresh at yesterday's meeting when the board voted to approve a contract with the Sulphur Basin Group for engineering services that will include doing preliminary economic and environmental feasibility studies on the potential reservoir sites. The cost of the task order covering the first year's planning process comes to $210,000, according to SRBA Administrator Mike Burke, with costs at about $1,050,000 projected for the next fiscal year.

"With the information that we've received so far with regard to other sources of water available to the Dallas/Fort Worth area, I'd still like to know on what basis will it be decided that Marvin Nichols needs to be built to supply Dallas rather than tapping some existing reservoirs," McConnell continued his query.

According to SRBA President Mike Huddleston, the Board is obligated to consider the reservoir as an option because it is a part of the state water plan. "For the Dallas/Fort Worth area, Marvin Nichols is not the single source of water that they're looking at," he responded. "They're looking at something like 28 other sources of water. ... But the key is to start planning now and looking at it because you can't just run out and build a lake overnight. It's going to take 15 or 20 years."

[Comment: If I recall correctly, Lakes Bob Sandlin and Cypress Springs were approved and construction was completed in less than a decade. This is pure, unadulterated bullshit by SeRBiAn Politburo Comrade Chairman "Muddlestonvic"! R.]

Huddleston said that the water plan considered population and industrial growth projections, made a forecast of how much water would be available to meet those needs, and listed potential sources that could be developed.

Some groups maintain that the figures in the water plan are themselves questionable, however. According to Rita Beving, Conservation Group Co-Chair of the Dallas Group Sierra Club, "this plan calculates future water needs using outdated information." She believes that if the Dallas area would simply use 20 to 22-percent less water, taking them down closer to the state average of water consumption, their water needs would vanish.

He didn't comment on Dallas' needs, but Huddleston noted that the useable water available in Northeast Texas as described in the water plan is probably lower than figures represent. "We all know that in Northeast Texas there's a lot of ground water that can't be used," he said of the high saline supply. "The state said that if there's ground water there, you have to consider it as useful drinking water."

When it comes to alternatives to the reservoir, Huddleston said those are being considered as well. Among several alternatives listed, Lake Texoma is one of the most popular. Texoma on the Texas-Oklahoma border is touted by the Texas Committee on Natural Resources as the most economical source. They maintain that by diverting the water when the lake is at its fullest and piping it to Lake Ray Roberts or other area lakes to keep them full would provide plenty of water, and cost a fraction of the price tag on the Marvin Nichols project.

Huddleston claimed, however, that the SRBA Administrator Mike Burke recently attended a meeting with the Red River Authority in which they determined the lake is not a viable option. "The salt in Lake Texoma almost makes it prohibitive of doing anything else to get any additional water out of it," he said.

[Comment: There are plenty of places in Texas where the local drinking water has an "acrid" or "salty" taste. People go swimming and water-skiing in Lake Texoma on a daily basis. There is nothing "unhealthy" about the water in Lake Texoma. As the old proverb relates, if you pray for rain, don't complain about the mud. Maybe Dallas should devise a system whereby they could provide "salty-tasting" water for their swimming pools, whilst still retaining "pure-tasting" water for their kitchens. This whole debate stinks to High Heaven. R.]

Despite his reservations that a viable alternative to the controversial reservoir is evident at this point, Huddleston did comment that "it may very well come down to the point where Marvin Nichols may never be built. I don't know that, and I don't think there's a person in the room that can guarantee that lake is going to be built."

Bill Ward, owner of Ward Timber Company, asked whether the board was obligated to go forward with the building of the lake, and asked about any contracts in place binding to that effect.

[Comment: NOTA BENE! When Comrade Chairman Muddlestonvic FIRST answered this question, he said YES. Every person in the room heard him say YES, and then he immediately changed his answer to NO, and explained his "correction" in muddling words, if indeed they can be called that. The newspaper didn't report this fact; however, Ms. Mary Elizabeth "Libby" Farmer of Wake Village, Texas, where Comrade Chairman Muddlestonvic is Mayor, brings a tape-recorder to all meetings and recorded this gaffe. In a court of law, there is no-way-José that Comrade Chairman Muddlestonvic could deny that he changed his reply. According to the old English proverb, "A clean glove often hides a dirty hand." Now, to continue with the newspaper article ... R.]

"The answer is no," Huddleston responded and explained that there was a contract signed with several entities, including the Northeast Texas Water Districts and the city of Dallas, who would fund the long-term project, including the initial feasibility studies. According to the terms of the contract, if the Sulphur River Basin Authority backs away from the project without a valid reason, the state may step in and build it anyway. If it is for reasons beyond their control, though, such as funding cuts, the project is a no-go for anyone.

"If it's left up to the Water Board and the people of Dallas and the senators and the representatives that are down there, and they say that the water's going to be needed, then they could very easily say, 'well, if you aren't going to build it, we're going to allow the Dallas/Fort Worth area to come in here and build it'," commented Huddelston. He said that the Sulphur River Basin Authority was created to prevent such a state legislative action from occurring. "If you allow the Dallas/Fort Worth area to come in and develop it, which the State very well could have done without the SRBA bieng there, they could have come up here, developed the water, and carried 100-percent of the water to the Dallas/Fort Worth area and Northeast Texas wouldn't have had any."

[Comment: As Region D has told us time and again, and as you continue to lie about this to various service clubs and vested interests, Mr. Muddlestonvic, WE IN NORTHEAST TEXAS DO NOT NEED ANYMORE WATER! R.]

In other business, the SRBA voted unanimously to authorize the president to least a 900-square-foot office space located at 911 N. Bishop Street in Wake Village, Texas, as the Authority's principal office. Up to this point, the authority has been housed in office space owned by Huddleston in Texarkana. They also considered an update on the Clean Rivers program, and set the net Sulphur River Board Authority meeting for July 30 at 1:30 in the Mount Pleasant Civic Center.

[Comment: Not mentioned here is the fact that considerable discussion was had over the continuing problem of the logjam in the river near the bridge on Highway 37. Clarissa Cutrell subsequently did a separate article about the logjam. To read it, CLICK HERE.]

Texarkana Gazette
SRBA EMPLOYEES ENGINEERS
By Prashansa Sai, 26 June 2002

MOUNT PLEASANT, Texas -- Members of the Sulphur River Basin Authority took their first step Tuesday toward making the proposed Marvin Nichols Reservoir a reality by formally employing two Texas engineering firms to begin the first phase of the impact studies necessary for acquiring a permit for the lake.

The board took formal action during their meeting here Tuesday and hired the Murray, Thomas and Griffin firm of Texarkana and the Dallas/Fort Worth-based firm Freese and Nichols. The decision followed a 15-minute public comment period.

Before taking questions from the attendees, board president Mike Huddleston warned that the board would not tolerate any uncivil remarks or personal attacks towards any member of the SRBA.

"What is the basis of determination of the of the need for the Marvin Nichols Reservoir?" asked John McConnell, a citizen of Red River County. "I don't understand why this notion is even being entertained when there are several other viable sources of water in the state that Dallas can draw from."

Huddleston replied by stating that Marvin Nichols was identified as one of 28 possible sources of water for the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex and that it was the Authority's job to investigate it as a source, especially since it is part of the current State Water Plan. "It may come to a point where Marvin Nichols is never built," said Huddleston. "I don't think there is anyone in this room that can guarantee that it will. Also, this is part of a 50-year plan, based on population projections that may or may not be accurate, but the key here is to start planning now. We can't go out and build a lake overnight."

Huddleston and board members chose to retain the two engineering firms to conduct economic feasibility studies, environmental impact studies and various site-specific studies. The studies may take up to five years to complete before the board obtains a permit from the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission that would allow the SRBA to actually begin construction on the reservoir.

"The contract is set up in such a way that there are various task orders that fall under one master plan," said Bob Murray, of Murray, Thomas and Griffin.

The initial cost for the first phase of task one is estimated to cost the board [READ -- Texas Taxpayers! R.] $210,000, according to Mike Burke, administrator for the SRBA.

"We'll even be looking at what kind of effects the lake will have on erosion and water quality in the area," said Murray.

The task of conducting economic feasibility studies, however, will be subcontracted out to Dr. Bernard Weinstein at the University of North Texas.

In other business, the board:
* Approved the minutes of the May 21 meeting.
* Approved a report of the groups's expenditures and cash position, which had a final balance of $424,799.99 as of June 14.
* Approved an update on the Clean Rivers Program as presented by Burke, who stated that Lake Wright Patman was still on the "Impaired Water Bodies" list with a designation of 'medium' because of high PH levels and low DO (dissolved oxygen) levels.
* Authorized Huddleston to enter into a lease agreement with Sandefur Properties, LP, to lease a 900-square-foot office space located at 911 N. Bishop St., Suite C-104, in Wake Village, for the SRBA's principal office.

The board also met in executive session to evaluate SRBA employees Burke and Nancy Rose, SRBA secretary, who both received a raise. Rose, who currently earns $8.50 an hour, received a pay increase of 50 cents, bringing her up to $9 an hour. Burke, whose base salary is currently $60,000 a year, received a $3,000 pay increase, bringing him up to $63,000 a year.

[Comment: On 23 July 2001 Mr. Burke told a meeting in Mount Vernon that he was receiving a salary of $73,000 a year. Are Mr. Huddleston and Mr. Burke lying about this? Those who deliberately lie to the public should NOT be allowed to hold public positions and have the power to distribute public money. R.]

The Sulphur River Basin Authority will next meet at 1:30 p.m. on July 30 at the Titus County Civic Center in Mount Pleasant.