Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

TRWD - Out from the smoke filled board room


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 AndyN

AndyN

    Skyscraper Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,279 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth

Posted 24 August 2006 - 08:32 PM

Looks like the TRV project has brought some attention to the Tarrant Regional Water Board activities. Their GM, Jim Oliver, gets top billing in this week's Fort Worth Weekly. I sure like Jim Lane's response!


See the full story here.

Rollin’ on the River
Expense account rules don’t seem to apply at the Tarrant Regional Water District.

By ELIZABETH BASSETT

The travel and expense policy for the Tarrant Regional Water District is simple. It says that the district will pay for business-related meals only if employees submit a receipt, a list of the diners’ partaking, and a statement of the meal’s business purpose. Anyone with questions should talk to general manager Jim Oliver or the assistant general manager, who hold discretion over reimbursements.

But when it’s the general manager himself who’s wining and dining on the public tab, who watches his expenses? That may be a $10,000 question for taxpayers.

When Fort Worth Weekly reviewed water district expense records from October 2003 through November 2005, it found dozens of instances of spending at restaurants, bars, and one private club, totaling more than $10,000 and paid for by Oliver with the district’s credit card, that didn’t comply with the expense policy. Most receipts listed only an incomplete name or initials; in other cases, there were no names of those dining at all. In most cases, either no business purpose is listed, or it is suggested only by a cryptic word or two. For others, no receipt was submitted at all. All were signed by Oliver.

Www.fortwortharchitecture.com

#2 360texas

360texas

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,512 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SW Fort Worth, Texas USA
  • Interests:Digital photography, computers since 1980, Panorama imaging, world travel. After 37 years retired Federal Service 1999.

Posted 25 August 2006 - 08:12 AM

Probably more than you would want to know.. but

Guess I would have to ask... what city/county/state agency is the TRWD accountable to ? The TWDB "Texas Water Developemnt Board http://www.twdb.stat.../home/index.asp

" Send Complaints to Complaints: A formal, written complaint regarding any of the TWDB's programs and services may be submitted to:

Ms. Carla Daws, Carla.Daws@twdb.state.tx.us , Communications Officer.

Written complaints may be sent via fax, e-mail, or mailed to the address listed above. The response to a formal written complaint generally will be completed within five working days of receipt of the complaint. "


TRWD Mission Statement:
I will answer my own question: http://www.trwd.com/TRWD_Overview.asp

"The Tarrant Regional Water District is a political subdivision of the State of Texas providing raw water resources to more than 30 different customers in the North Central Texas area, including the cities of Fort Worth, Arlington, Mansfield and the Trinity River Authority of Texas.

In addition to supplying quality water to its customers, the Water District also provides vital flood control along the banks of the Trinity River, preserves and protects the environment and enhances recreational opportunities for the public.

The Water District, led by a publicly elected five-member board, has built and maintains four reservoirs, 150 miles of water-transport pipelines, lake-level and water-quality gauges, 27 miles of floodway levees, a 260-acre wetland water reuse study project, pumping stations and the Trinity River Trails. "

Dave still at

360texas45x145.png
Visit 360texas.com


#3 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 25 August 2006 - 04:24 PM

And why do these clowns have special "fringe" benefits and company credit cards? This should be a VOLUNTEER association with elected officials to only determine what we need and how much it will cost, then have this project and that project up for the lowest bidder. That's all, reall simple here folks.

Makes you want a re-election with many of propositions to debate.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#4 rogerdr

rogerdr

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  • Location:Westcliff
  • Interests:Listening to the cicadas and looking for geckos and horned lizards.

Posted 18 September 2006 - 06:02 AM

Unfortunately, Safly, unless this sort of thing gets front page news, not only would the trickle of normal citywide or county elections voters not know who to vote against, very likely there would only be one person on the ballot per seat. The encumbent. This level of monetary midemeanor deserves investigation by the Texas Attorney General anyway.

#5 AndyN

AndyN

    Skyscraper Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,279 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth

Posted 14 December 2006 - 01:11 PM

Interesting how the funding on this project might not now come through - in spite of what Jim Lane said when he was trying to get elected.

Fort Worth Weekly Article

Trinity River Vision opponents want to shut off the funding faucet.

By DAN MCGRAW

The Trinity River Vision project would make this sleepy stretch of the river only a memory.
When U.S Rep. Kay Granger pushed funding through Congress for the Trinity River Vision project — anointed as flood control, but really an economic development venture — she did it with amazing speed. The approval for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to spend $110 million on a bypass channel, a 33-acre lake, and other accoutrements came just a few years after a preliminary master plan was approved. It came a full year before an environmental impact study had even been completed, something that all flood control projects require.
Www.fortwortharchitecture.com

#6 vjackson

vjackson

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,324 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 15 December 2006 - 08:43 AM

I've really never commented on the FW's or Dallas' river projects. And this^ is the reason. The TRV projects are tied up in so much complicated and confusing governmental, bureaucratic red-tape that they simply may never happen. Or if they do come to fruition, they'll be scaled down drastically from the orginal plan.

#7 AndyN

AndyN

    Skyscraper Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,279 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth

Posted 17 April 2007 - 08:31 PM

Everyone loves a good conspiracy. Here's one from McAlester, Ok.



Sardis water authority seeks FBI investigation

By DOUG RUSSELL

News Editor

Members of the Sardis Lake Water Authority are asking the FBI to look into attempts to take over the rural water district.

Authority members mailed letters to the Oklahoma state Auditor and Inspector, U.S. Department of Agriculture in Washington, D.C., Gov. Brad Henry, U.S. Rep. Dan Boren and Sen. Tom Coburn, as well as to the FBI.

The letter alleges, among other things, the Authority has undergone tremendous political and financial pressure by groups attempting to take over the lake and its water system almost since the SLWA’s inception.

The Authority began operation in the fall of 2004, but documents dated Jan. 6, 2005, indicate that outside groups were already working to take over the lake and the water it contains, the letter states, adding “A conspiracy exists by outsiders to take over the SLWA’s federal property, water rights and management for purposes other than USDA approved beneficiary use.”

According to the letter, the Authority has another 35 years to repay a $2.8 million debt, but the Atoka office of the USDA recently ordered the water board to advertise a $3.2 million debt for sale to the public or the USDA would foreclose on the mortgage for its water system.

The letter also cites recent moves by the Tarrant Regional Water District, of Tarrant County, Texas, and other entities interested in acquiring Sardis Lake and its water.

Contact Doug Russell at drussell@mcalesternews.com.


Www.fortwortharchitecture.com

#8 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 17 April 2007 - 11:03 PM

I sense a FWWeekly EXPOSE! Yippeeeee.

Sculley and Mulder, eat yer heart out.

I am also interested in reading up on the USDA approved parameters pertaining to the Sardis Lake water use. Being that it is federally approved, does Tarrant have a right to inquire? I'm sure the use would be related to livestock.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#9 AndyN

AndyN

    Skyscraper Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,279 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth

Posted 18 April 2007 - 07:20 AM

Safly, I think we might be jumping the gun here. In the broad ranging indictments, I sense just a little paranoia. TRWD might not be responsible for anything, but it probably plays pretty well in Oklahoma that those nasty old Texans are gunning for their water. Could be gross incompetence on the part of the Sardis Lake operators causing the loan to be called early. We don't have enough details yet.
Www.fortwortharchitecture.com

#10 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 18 April 2007 - 02:05 PM

Like I was saying, I'd like to read further into that loan structure. Any clauses or stipulations to discover.

If GROSS incompetence were evident, then there should have never been any issues and finger pointing with the water control. If the FEDERAL DEAL calls for an entity like TRWD to have accessibility or ACQUIRING RIGHTS of a federally funded water location, then SARDIS should be free game, if and only if granted by the USDA loan caretakers.


One would think??? huh.gif
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#11 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,945 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 30 April 2014 - 08:45 AM

It sounds like the TRWD is out of control. Maybe on the next ballot for directors there could be a proposition to recall all sitting board members and significantly restructure the organization. What would be a better form for this sort of authority to assume in order to avoid the secrecy, avoidance of accountability, in-fighting, and other nonsense that seems to have typified operations up to this point. Water is a if not THE major concern for our fast-growing region going ahead, and having this sort of circus atmosphere surrounding efforts to address it seems a poor option. 

 

http://www.star-tele...rd-meeting.html



#12 RenaissanceMan

RenaissanceMan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 351 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 30 April 2014 - 10:21 AM

It sounds like the TRWD is out of control. Maybe on the next ballot for directors there could be a proposition to recall all sitting board members and significantly restructure the organization. What would be a better form for this sort of authority to assume in order to avoid the secrecy, avoidance of accountability, in-fighting, and other nonsense that seems to have typified operations up to this point. Water is a if not THE major concern for our fast-growing region going ahead, and having this sort of circus atmosphere surrounding efforts to address it seems a poor option. 
 
http://www.star-tele...rd-meeting.html

Yeah... that's not at all the conclusion I would walk away with.

What's going on here is that you've got one wealthy (hotels) landowner out near Dallas who owns property that is (and has been for some time and several planning processes) in the path of a major water pipeline that will run from Lake Palestine to Fort Worth, serving both the TRWD and Dallas's water district. This man, despite all of the proper procedures and planning steps being followed, categorically refuses for his land to be touched in any way by the planned pipeline. Going around his property has been studied and would add substantially to the costs to the taxpayers of funding the project.

So, given that the TRWD followed the steps available to them by law and has been in the position to move ahead with the project, with or without this one property owner's blessing, he then financed the campaigns of several candidates who he set up to run for board positions at the TRWD - the strategy being, once he had control of the board, he could then kill the project and his property would be in the clear (who cares about the need to get water to residents of Fort Worth, right?). The slate of candidates that he backed ran on a platform that accused the TRWD of acting inappropriately and without transparency, with one or two of the candidates filing a slew of Open Records requests, basically bombarding the TRWD's staff and slowing them down, while hoping to get a sliver of dirt that could be used against the board.

Only one of the Dallas property owner's puppets... I mean, financially-backed candidates got elected. This of course wasn't enough to get him control of the board in that go around, but with one more potential election coming up for two more board members, he figured he could give it another shot just in time ahead of the project's official process for condemnation of the part of his property that would hold the new pipeline.

This past session, the Texas Legislature extended the terms of the water district board members in a way that basically preserved the current board until after the pipeline project is finally initiated. The Dallas property owner had several of his failed candidates sue the board, though both state and federal courts have ruled against him, leaving him without any additional legal cards to play (and costing the TRWD a boatload in unnecessary legal expenses).

Meanwhile, the one candidate that this guy did manage to get elected to the board has done nothing but resist every possible action taken by the TRWD and doing pretty much anything within her power to disrupt the board's activities while promoting herself as being a crusader of government transparency (when really she was just a mouthpiece of one wealthy property owner who didn't like that a government agency was going to use its power of eminent domain to run infrastructure through his land). While the TRWD was fending off this guy's lawsuits, they were fairly limited in how they could realistically and officially react to this one board member who wasn't (as she was claiming) acting in the public's interest but was just being used to try and derail a public water infrastructure project. Now that the lawsuits are pretty much over and the existing board intact for the time period they need to get this pipeline project done, they are free to censure this one board members actions against the board and the interests of the TRWD.

So, note to wealthy dallasites: don't try to strong arm folks in Fort Worth... it doesn't turn out well.

#13 Volare

Volare

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,576 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oakhurst, Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:running, cycling, geocaching, photography, gardening, hunting, fishing...

Posted 30 April 2014 - 12:39 PM

Only problem with your theory: 90% of the benefits of the IPL accrue to Dallas. Why on earth is TRWD getting involved in a multi-billion dollar project that is nearly entirely to the benefit of Dallas? TRWD already has pipelines in place with the ability to feed water from Richland Chambers and Cedar Creek Reserviors back up hill to Benbrook and downstream to the Holly Plants. That dog don't hunt.

 

The TRWD censured Kelleher for supposedly making false statements to the Fort Worth City Council. Their own TRWD employee Linda Christie made a statement to the Council that same night that was filled with false and misleading statements. I suppose you are only subject to censure if you make false statements that the majority of the board don't agree with.

 

So we've got one board member purportedly representing a wealthy landowner in Dallas. Well, we've got 4 board members looking out for the wealthy of Fort Worth. Who is looking out for the common citizen?



#14 RenaissanceMan

RenaissanceMan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 351 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 30 April 2014 - 12:50 PM

So we've got one board member purportedly representing a wealthy landowner in Dallas. Well, we've got 4 board members looking out for the wealthy of Fort Worth. Who is looking out for the common citizen?


I dunno... Coast Guard?

#15 youngalum

youngalum

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 847 posts

Posted 01 May 2014 - 12:12 PM

No more tea party members on the TRWD is the answer.  I am so sick of hearing that everything those people don't like is a conspiracy on every subject. 



#16 Keller Pirate

Keller Pirate

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 900 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Keller

Posted 01 May 2014 - 05:24 PM

The TRWD Board and it's General Manager were in the news for questionable practices for years before Mary Kelleher came along.  In doing a Google search I could not find any reference to her party affiliation, let alone any Tea Party references, except for here.  Her 8,942 votes were a record for any director ever elected to the board.  That is a sad number and tells me not enough people are paying attention to what goes on there.  Even the Star-Telegram said in an editorial, "there is a lot of room for improvement at the district, most notably in the openness of its operations and responsiveness to its constituents."

 

The Dallas businessman/rancher that is used to smear her has not yet lost his property to the IPL project.  If news reports are to be believed, TRWD has filed for condemnation of his property, but no hearings have been scheduled.  In fact the section of the IPL that would run through his property will only deliver water to Dallas.  He isn't denying any water to Fort Worth residents.  Of course, he wouldn't be a good boogieman if that were well known.

 

How about no more old liberal democrats on the board that wasted $12 million suing Oklahoma all the way to the Supreme Court and losing every step of the way.  How is that for a tit for tat?  Let's hear it for the Fort Worth Way.



#17 youngalum

youngalum

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 847 posts

Posted 02 May 2014 - 11:17 AM

Again--opposing a pipeline underground isn't going to harm his property and it is a joint pipeline for both cities.  Going after the water on the red river was smart as it is cheaper than building a new lake.  Additionally, losing money on a litigation case were the law was not settled/precedent was a good use of district dollars.  It has nothing to do with liberal politics or conservative politics.  Nothing!

 

If you don't think that Ms. Kelleher or the people she ran with on the same platform are not tea party people you are wearing blinders.  Finally, I recall you have an issue with the water board for years for running or thinking about running and quit/lost.  Additionally, you are opposed to common sense water conservation policies of twice a week watering--I mean the horror of having to save the earth is just a darn inconvenience.

 

Let's hear it for a non-partisan water board.



#18 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,651 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside

Posted 25 August 2020 - 10:37 AM

 

The most significant ordinance revisions include:

 

 The geographic impact of the ordinances is greatly expanded:

o The definition for District Land is expanded to include all land that drains to District Water.

o The definition for District Water is expanded to include all bodies or accumulations of water, natural or artificial, located within the District’s Service Area.

o The new definition of Service Area includes the area where the District provides raw water to customers. This includes all or part of 11 counties (Tarrant, Denton, Parker, etc.)

 

 The authority of the General Manager is greatly expanded to:

o Create, set the amount of, and collect fees for licenses and permits.

o Promulgate, adopt and amend residential improvement permit guidelines.

o Adopt or amend any standards governing construction or maintenance of any improvement on or in District Land or District Water.

o Require the District’s customers (e.g. the City of Fort Worth) to adopt ordinances implementing the District’s master drainage plan and other plans for water quality, and preventing waste or unauthorized use of District Water.

 

Stories from FWBP and Star T

Text from City Council



#19 Volare

Volare

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,576 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oakhurst, Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:running, cycling, geocaching, photography, gardening, hunting, fishing...

Posted 25 August 2020 - 11:54 AM

Fort Worth has made their bed with the TRWD, now they get to lie in it.



#20 txbornviking

txbornviking

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,368 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arlington Heights

Posted 18 March 2021 - 08:46 AM

Jim Oliver retiring....

 

 

https://fortworthbus...35-year-tenure/



#21 Volare

Volare

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,576 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oakhurst, Fort Worth, TX
  • Interests:running, cycling, geocaching, photography, gardening, hunting, fishing...

Posted 12 January 2023 - 06:04 PM

The fun continues...

 

https://fortworthrep...water-district/






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users