a simple, first-step for reforming dodd-frank

A division of theTexas Land Developers Assn (TLDA)

Protecting your right toBUY, SELL AND USE

your property

2015 Texas legislative sessionpromises some exciting times

By KURT JOHNSONNewsletter editor and analyst

The 2015 version of the Texas legislative session begins in January, and while it may portend to be business as usual, there will be some major differences compared to the past.

If Dan Patrick is the new lieu-tenant governor (the most likely prospect, according to the analysts and statis-ticians), then the two-thirds rule likely will be gone from the Senate, which means that the Democrat minority won't be able to keep bills from coming up for a vote. If that happens, it suggests a lesser need for compromises and the potential for more testiness and divisiveness.

On the House side, Speaker Joe Strauss has sent clear signals that he is focusing on the state finances and trim-ming back some state agency budgets, in-cluding taking a hard luck at the incentives that are provided to businesses to move to Texas.

And then, of course, there's public education, with the continuing school funding lawsuit still unresolved and a renewed push for charter schools, a staple of the Patrick campaign.

Nonetheless, those who assume the election of Greg Abbott as governor along with the elections of Patrick and Strauss predict that the session should be good for business and commerce, given the track records of those three office-holders. Progressive reforms in the areas of market-based zoning, land develop-ment, real estate marketing and seller-financing seem more viable this time around, given the experience of past reality checks and the need to keep Texas moving forward as the most business-friendly state in the nation.

And TL&M/TLDA members will be kept fully informed of developments, in this newsletter, and on the website.

A simple, first-stepfor reforming

DODD-FRANKand the SAFE Act

The Dodd-Frank Act and the corollary SAFE Act have been identified correctly as being in-credibly complex with a lot of un-intended consequences.

At least, one hopes that the adverse consequences for real estate transactions and commerce were unintended. The negative effects of this legislation and the consequent implementation are a major burden for real estate commerce.

One of the keys to getting needed reform is to start with an achievable, important first step. Simplifying the issue into understandable segments is a key to eventually solving the entire problem. When talking to a member of Congress, the most effective description of the problem leads to the most understandable solution.

This first step isn't compli-cated. The law requires mortgage licensing if a seller-financier ex-ceeds five transactions per year. But the mortgage licensing requirement is aimed at profes-sional mortgage bankers and in-stitutional lenders, not the seller-financiers who are in the real estate business and are not in-volved in institutional banking and mortgage lending. The simple fact is that a seller-financier is doing business in a different way because his or her own property is involved. Any licensing require-ments for seller-financiers, should be tailored to the reality of that business, not to the complex world of institutional mortgage lending which is an entirely different—and more complicated—animal.

There are other issues, of course, but this one represents a very good start.

September 2014

Published byTexas Land & Mortgage

a division of theTexas Land Developers Association

Kurt Johnson, Editor

[email protected]

(512) 660-9404

The website is at:

http://www.texaslandandmortgage.com

MEMBER BENEFITSIn addition to the information

provided on the website and in this monthly newsletter, TL&M/TLDA also maintains a staff presence in Austin, Texas to represent the Association's interests in communicating with elected and other officials, state agencies, the Texas legislature, regu-latory agencies, and allied organiza-tions and individuals.

To inquire about membership, use the contact information above.

Disclaimer: All information pub-lished in this Newsletter and on the website of the Association has been vetted utilizing the best efforts of the editor and staff. Any errors are unintentional and will be corrected with notification if correcting documentation is provided. Publication of information not internally generated or written is either published with approval of the source(s) or conforms to the Fair Use provision of the U.S. Copyright Act. Unless attributed, all opinions are characterizations represent-ing the conclusions of the editor and/or staff.

© TL&M/TLDA

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.texaslandandmortgage.com/

Jess FieldsTexas Public Policy

Foundation

Rep. Terry Canales

TL&M/TLDA Meetings gain popularitybecause of informative speakers

and opportunities for professional networkingThe TL&M/TLDA member meetings continue to be well-received with

excellent attendance. At the August meeting, Jess Fields, an analyst with the Texas Public Policy

Foundation, (TPPF) provided an informative presentation about regulations, zoning, and other property issues.

TPPF is an Austin-based think tank which publishes and otherwise circu-lates highly-regarded information on a variety of important issues.

For example, on August 13 TPPF's Department of Local Governance released a study co-authored by Fields and James Quintero which stated: Cities, counties, school districts, and special districts in Texas are awash in red ink and the problem is getting worse, according to recently obtained information from the Texas bond Review Board. The graphic shown below accompanied the study:

Source: Texas Bond Review Board

The speaker at the September 4 meeting (at noon, with a meal, at The Echo in Edinburg) will be Rep. Terry Canales who represents part of Hidalgo County and serves on the Criminal Jurisprudence, Energy Resources and Water Desalination Committees in the Texas House of Representatives.

Guests (non-members) are always welcome at these member meetings. In addition to hearing from excellent speakers, the professional networking which accompanies the fellowship is an added benefit of attending. Many of the TL&M/TLDA members have been involved in real estate, property development, property self-financing, note processing, and local and state government for a long time. They are willing to share their expertise based on a wealth of experience in working for better public policies.

Non-members can access the main portions of the website, where the newsletters and calendars are posted.

Speaker Joe Strauss

Speaker Straus makes appointmentsto Legislative Council and Ethics Committee

and begins budget reform initiative

Texas House Speaker Joe Straus has made appointments to the Texas Legislative Council and the Select Interim Committee to Study Ethics Laws, and in addition he has launched a budget reform initiative for the upcoming 2015 legislative session.

Speaker Straus named the following Members to serve on Legislative Council: Reps. Dwayne Bohac of Houston, Travis Clardy of Nacogdoches, Helen Giddings of Dallas, Larry Phillips of Sherman and Senfronia Thompson of Houston. As Chairman of the House Committee on Administration, Representative Charlie Geren of Fort Worth will continue in his ex-officio role on the Council.

The Council provides a range of services to the Legislature and related agencies, such as bill-drafting, research, publishing, document distribution and technological assistance. The Council consists of the Speaker, the Lieutenant Governor, six Members of the House and six Members of the Texas Senate.

“The House relies heavily on Legislative Council every day,” said Speaker Straus. “These legislators will provide strong leadership for an agency that plays a very important role in the legislative process.”

Rep. Sarah Davis of Houston will co-chair the Select Interim Committee to Study Ethics Laws. Speaker Straus also appointed Reps. Reps. Ken King of Canadian and Poncho Nevárez of Eagle Pass to the committee, as well as Austin attorney Ross Fischer. Fischer is Chairman of the Legislative and Campaign Law Section of the State Bar of Texas and is a former Chairman of the Texas Ethics Commission.

The committee was created last year by the passage of Senate Bill 1773. Its purpose is to review laws and regulations related to ethics, such as those focused on campaign finance, lobbying and personal finance disclosures. The other four members of the committee, including the other co-chair, are appointed by the Lieutenant Governor.

“Sound ethics laws can help build and maintain public confidence in government,” Speaker Straus said. “I trust the members of this committee to give those laws a thorough review and recommend ways to make our system more transparent and accountable to citizens.”

Speaker Straus also has instructed Texas House budget-writers to begin taking a deeper look at certain agencies’ responsibilities, costs and operating practices.

As they write the state budget every two years, members of the Appropriations Committee gather information about every state agency and its priorities. This process has allowed the Legislature to consistently and proactively limit spending and produce balanced budgets with healthy reserve funds. As a result, the current state budget stays beneath expected growth in population plus inflation. And Texas continues to have one of the lowest per-capita spending rates in the country, ranking 47th out of the 50 states in 2012.

To continue -- and further -- the House’s commitment to fiscal restraint and sound priorities, Speaker Straus instructed the Appropriations Committee to hold hearings on a pilot process called Strategic Fiscal Review (SFR). Through SFR, committee members will ask fundamental questions about the services provided by agencies, their use of state funds and the extent to which they could carry out their missions with fewer employees and resources. This work will provide tools and information for the 84th Legislature to make more informed budget decisions.

(Continued on Page 4)

SpaceX launches its firstFalcon 9 rocket from it's

facility in Vandenberg CA

“This process will allow legislators and agencies to have a needed conversation about the role of government, the use of taxpayer dollars and the priorities that we set as a state,” Speaker Straus said. “It’s a more comprehensive approach that will give legislators better information to use when making budget and policy decisions.”

The following agencies and programs will undergo SFR in the coming months: Trusteed Programs within the Office of the Governor; Department of Information Resources; General Revenue-funded programs at the Department of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services; Higher Education Coordinating Board; System Offices of General Academic Institutions; Available University Fund; Texas State Law Library; Juvenile Justice Department; Department of Public Safety; Department of Transportation; and the Public Utility Commission.

“This is a significant change in how we allocate taxpayer dollars, and those types of changes are not made overnight,” Speaker Straus said. “By starting with a small number of important and visible agencies, we are taking the first step in a larger process of more closely evaluating how every taxpayer dollar is used. Our experience with these agencies will help the House expand SFR to other areas of state government in the near future.”

The Speaker's press release states that has made budget transparency a top priority in recent years. Under his leadership in 2013, the House significantly reduced the decades-old practice of allowing unspent fee revenue to pile up so that it can be counted to balance the rest of the budget. Earlier this year, Speaker Straus announced that the introduced House budget for 2016-17 will use the State Highway Fund solely for transportation, instead of allowing some of that money to fund other priorities.

SpaceX gets major helpfrom Cameron County and State of Texas

The commissioners of Cameron County (TX) have voted to waive 10 years of county property taxes as a portion of the agreement with SpaceX in order to bring the rocket-launch company to Cameron County.

The launch facility will be located at the Boca Chica beach, east of Brownsville.

The commissioners are also negotiating an economic agreement with Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX). According to various reports, SpaceX projects the addition of 300 jobs to the county while making an investment of $85 million. SpaceX also estimates that the jobs number could grow to 500 within 10 years.

The State of Texas has offered a grant of $2.3 million from its Enterprise Fund to go directly to SpaceX and an additional $13 million to help the Cameron County Spaceport Development Corporation build infrastructure.

SpaceX prepares for a launch from its Cape Canerval control center

(Both photos on this page courtesy of SpaceX)

EFFICIENT MARKETSin residential and commercial real estate

are key support elements for economic developmentMany parts of Texas are experiencing robust progress in employment,

education and economic development, and the Rio Grande Valley is no exception.And one of the key, substantive underpinnings of such progress are effi-

ciently-operating real estate markets which are not constrained by unreasonable restrictions and regulations involving financing, land use, utility infrastructure, and other components of the processes within the matrix.

SpaceX is adding at least 300 jobs (500 in 10 years is the estimate) and is the first private company to carry cargo to and from the International Space Station, and it is working on a technology to also carry astronauts.

The University of Texas in the Rio Grande Valley will begin educating students in the fall of 2015 and will have facilities across the Rio Grande Valley in Brownsville, Harlingen, Edinburg and McAllen. In addition to the professional jobs which will be created, there is the downstream effect of support jobs, all of which will create more demand for residential and even commercial real estate.

But these positive aspects won't reach their full fruition if real estate marketing is constrained by unreasonable laws, rules, regulations and policies which slow or hold back vibrant real estate markets.

Residential development is a case in point. Developers offering seller-financing can help meet the growing need for housing if they are given the op-portunity to market and finance their products without unreasonable constraint.

Constraints have included the inability to forward-market property in order to show consumer demand and thus acquire needed financing, along with onerous penalties for minor technical issues which do not involve health and safety matters and which can be quickly corrected after the need for any correction is known.

And the adverse impacts of the Dodd-Frank legislation and the SAFE Act on the seller-financing aspect of property transfer have not reached the point of being fully vetted. Nonetheless, the needed reforms don't come easily, which is why continued diligence is required in moving toward achieving those reforms.

The members and staff of TL&M/TLDA work at the city, county, state and federal levels of government to identify the needed reforms and pursue them at the appropriate levels of government.

And part of this effort involves working with allied organizations in mortgage, banking, homebuilding, real estate, think tank and other venues to develop consensus regarding needed reforms and the approach needed to achieve them.

Momentum toward a robust regional economy—no matter where that region might be—hinges upon cooperation between government and private business to achieve the proper balance of complex moving parts within rules and regulations which are fairly determined.

EUCLIDIAN ZONINGand its potentially negative impact

on land use and land valuesEuclid of Alexandria—Greek mathematician (300 B.C.) who formalized geometry

Euclidian zoning—Single-use zoning in which everday uses are separatedfrom each other and land uses of the same type grouped together

(Compiled from various research sources)

The concept of property zoning is generally deemed to be a positive force for communities and the properties within them, following along the theory that compatible uses in context will reduce or eliminate nuisances hostile to those properties.

But zoning has the potential of reducing a property's value or even making it inhospitable in the market to the detriment of both the property owner and the community.

For example, if a property is zoned for commercial use and residential use is prohibited, and that commercial use has building or architectural requirements which make the property unmarketable because of cost, the property owner is harmed because the property is isolated from sale. And the community is harmed because the failure to develop or improve the property results in lower property tax revenue and sales tax revenue.

Thus, zoning which is based on ideology without any basis in market realities can lock property out of the market.


“Euclidian zoning” is the most pervasive type of zoning in the United States Standard Euclidian zoning refers to the segregation of land into four uses, deemed as incompatible: single-family residential, multi-family residential (including apartments), commercial, and industrial. In a municipal zoning ordinance, the municipality decides for each use the location and the land area it can be developed on. The goal, in theory, is to preemptively minimize nuisances (i.e., negative externalities), which are likely to occur when incompatible uses border each other.

A more detailed version of Euclidian zoning – known as Euclidian II zoning – holds onto the segregation of incompatible uses concept and categorizes them into a hierarchy based on the quality of their externalities. Land uses with negative externalities are called “lower” uses, while those with fewer negative, none, or even positive, externalities are called “higher” uses.

The common categorization, from highest to lowest, is the following: single- family detached residential, single-family attached residential, multi-family residential, apartment buildings, commercial, and industrial. In this zoning theory, then, lower uses are restricted from being in areas zoned for higher uses, while higher uses can exist in areas zoned for lower use. This small adjustment from standard Euclidian zoning of strict segregation can help give a zoning ordinance greater flexibility when faced with a changing land market, as it allows more legal facilitation for lower uses to be converted to higher uses when the market demands it. At the same time, higher land uses are given legal certainty that lower uses will not invade their territory and subsequently lower land values for that specified use. But the devil is in the details—the complicated details which haven't correctly evaluated the impacts of such zoning on the real market forces.

This kind of zoning can become irrational in the context of market realities. Euclidian zoning is irrational because its proponents talk about preserving land values, while in practice it often restricts the market from determining the most economically efficient use of the land. It is reactionary because the idea of restricting development where development is poised to occur is a paranoid and selfish resistance against change--change which is likely to make everyone better off in the long run. And, it is troubling because so many municipalities have decided to use this form of land use planning without concerning the larger economic and social framework in which they exist.


Euclidian zoning in such detail and without contextual exceptions is not necessarily the best framework for regulating land use. At best, zoning ordinances are informed by observances of spatial economics in the real world, and seek to work with these principles to develop a desirable situation.

But at worst, zoning ordinances may be driven by the ideologies of elected officials and/or staffs (or at least the most vocal ones) who seek to use contorted zoning as a defense against the economic transactions which would be most beneficial to the market. It is an attempt to withhold land from being freely traded, yet this action is viewed as not having the same consequences as when capital and labor are restricted in their trade. There are real prices to pay when enacting these restrictions.

A textbook case involves a landowner in Central Texas whose property is in a satellite city of a major urban center. This satellite city, using what is referenced as smartcode zoning, deemed this property as retail commercial when in fact, because of both access and topography, it's most economically viable use is as single-family and multi-family residential. In fact, the property owner has received several lucrative offers from developers if the property could be utilized as residential, but the city's zoning committee and council won't approve the change, apparently hoping that ultimately the property will develop for the higher-end use to the city's benefit. But during the 10 years that the property has been marketed, it has never sold because of the zoning. The result amounts to 10 years of lower property tax and sales tax revenue for the city, because the ideology being pursued pays no taxes.

Zoning as presently practiced and as a tool to mitigate negative impacts may be on its way to being outdated in its present form. The market itself might be a better driver in the public interest. As economic structures change, planners need to assess established zoning codes and fit them to a dynamic model of land use change. If the public sector allows the land market to freely compete for uses, land use conversions will ensue which will maximize the economic efficiency of the land, and ultimately raise land values well beyond what a restricted view of land markets, through zoning, could support. The caveat is that, without zoning (and similar land use restrictions), the pursuit of community and social goals are eliminated for the sake of economic determinism.

(A portion of this article utilizes information produced in research by the Highland Park Zoning Study, the unified code of various cities, and Barlow Burke, Dwight Merriam)

Deadline for commenting on Texas' water solutions is

September 1On Nov. 5, 2013, Texas voters approved Proposition 6 enabling the state

to create two funds-the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas (SWIFT) and the State Water Implementation Revenue Fund for Texas (SWIRFT)-that will help finance projects in the state water plan.

The deadline for sending comments to the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) is barely over a week away. Comments must be received by September 1 in order to be considered.

Before the funds are made available, TWDB must develop a point system to prioritize projects and on how the funds will operate. Once these tasks are complete, the SWIFT can be used to fund rural water projects, projects related to conservation and reuse, and projects in communities and cities of all sizes.

The Falcon Lake Dam on the Rio Grande

On November 5, 2013, Texans approved Proposition 6. This legislation created two funds—the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas (SWIFT) and the State Water Implementation Revenue Fund for Texas (SWIRFT)—that will help finance projects in the state water plan. As a a result of Proposition 6, a one-time $2 billion transfer was authorized from the state's Economic Stabilization Fund (known as the Rainy Day Fund) to the SWIFT.

The Texas Legislature, with approval of Texas voters, created the SWIFT and SWIRFT to make financing water projects more affordable and to provide ongoing state financial assistance for water supplies. Grants are expressly prohibited.


The legislation also specifies that not less than 10 percent of the funds go to projects serving rural communities and agricultural conservation projects and not less than 20 percent of the funds go to water conservation and reuse projects.

The funds available through SWIFT will help Texas communities of all sizes—from small rural towns to large metropolitan areas—develop drought-proof water supplies. Projects range from conservation and reuse, to desalting groundwater and seawater, to building new pipelines and developing reservoirs and well fields, to many more.

To be eligible for funding, a project must be included in the most recent state water plan. These projects were recommended by local and regional water experts for their communities.

By legislative mandate, at least 20 percent of SWIFT funds must be used for conservation and reuse projects, and at least 10 percent must go to projects serving rural communities and Texas farmers.

Development of the state water plan is central to the mission of the TWDB. Based on 16 regional water plans, the plan addresses the needs of all water user groups in the state – municipal, irrigation, manufacturing, livestock, mining, and steam-electric power – during a repeat of the drought of record that the state suffered in the 1950s. At the end of each five-year regional water planning cycle, agency staff compiles information from the approved regional water plans and other sources to develop the state water plan, which is presented to TWDB's governing Board for adoption. The final adopted plan is then submitted to the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and the Texas Legislature.

The 2012 state water plan is the ninth state water plan and the third plan based on the regional water planning process. In addition to incorporating the regional water plans, the state water plan serves as a guide to state water policy and includes legislative recommendations that the Board believes are needed and desirable to facilitate voluntary water transfers. The plan also identifies river and stream segments of unique ecological value and sites of unique value for the construction of reservoirs that the Board recommends for protection.

Here are key points about the program1. What is the Texas Water Development Board?The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) is a state agency formed in 1957 in response to Texas' record-breaking drought.The agency has three main responsibilities: assisting with regional water planning and preparing the state water plan every five years; collecting and distributing water data; and providing loan and grant money for Texas water and wastewater projects.

2. What is Proposition 6?Proposition 6 creates and constitutionally dedicates two new funds: the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas (SWIFT) and the State Water Implementation Revenue Fund for Texas (SWIRFT).

3. Where will the money come from?The legislature has authorized a one-time, $2 billion investment from the Economic Stabilization Fund (also known as the Rainy Day Fund) to the SWIFT. These funds are designed to make the financing of water projects more affordable and to provide consistent, ongoing state financial assistance for water supplies.

4. What will this program do for Texas?The funds created through SWIFT would help communities develop and optimize water supplies at cost-effective interest rates. The upfront costs on water infra-


structure can often make it difficult for some communities to build what they need. The SWIFT provides the economic opportunity for communities to overcome this hurdle by providing low-cost, flexible financing options for water projects. This financial assistance will enable local communities to begin needed water projects.

5. How will the program be used to ensure adequate water supplies?

The funds will be used to provide low-cost financing for projects in the state water plan-a plan created by local and regional entities, with the assistance of the state, to meet future water demands. Every five years 16 regional water planning groups assess the projected population and water demands and supplies in their areas over the next 50 years. Each region then compiles a regional water plan, and those plans are rolled up into the state water plan. The state water plan also includes important information on statewide trends and policy issues, and it lists the water supply strategies identified to meet the regional water shortages over the next 50 years. The 2012 State Water Plan contains numerous strategies to meet water needs during drought. Those strategies are the water supply projects that will be eligible for funding through the SWIFT and SWIRFT.

6. Is my community represented in the state water plan?

Yes. Every community and every water user group in Texas is planned for. Water user groups include cities, rural water users, agriculture, livestock, manufacturers, mining, and steam-electric power. The 2012 State Water Plan addresses the needs of roughly 3,000 water user groups.

7. How will SWIFT help rural communities and Texas farmers?

Rural and agricultural stakeholders serve as part of the water planning process. This process identifies water supply projects that go into the state water plan. Our planning process helps identify water projects that are needed by rural and agricultural interests. Moreover, the legislature made serving these interests a priority: directing the TWDB to undertake applying not less than 10 percent of the funds to projects serving rural communities and Texas farmers.

8. What water supply projects will be supported by these funds?

Projects in the state water plan will be eligible for support from the SWIFT and SWIRFT. These water projects range from conservation and reuse, to desalting groundwater and seawater, to building new pipelines and developing reservoirs and well fields, and include many other kinds of projects as well. Through the regional water planning process, local and regional water experts recommended these projects as the most efficient and viable ones for their communities.

9. How will this program support water conservation?

The legislature has recognized the importance of water conservation and reuse strategies in managing and protecting the state's water resources. The legislature directed the TWDB to undertake applying not less than 20 percent of SWIFT financial assistance for water conservation and reuse projects. The TWDB is also directed to undertake applying an additional 10 percent for projects to serve rural areas, including agricultural conservation projects.


10. Could these funds be used to build reservoirs?

Since all water supply projects in the state water plan are eligible, reservoirs will be eligible for support from the SWIFT and SWIRFT if they are strategies in the state water plan. Reservoirs make up approximately 15 percent of the total financial assistance requested in the 2012 State Water Plan.

11. How will the state ensure these funds are protected?

As required by legislation, the $2 billion investment in the SWIFT will be protected by the Texas Treasury Safe Keeping Trust Company. An advisory committee will evaluate TWDB's management of the funds. Committee members will include the state comptroller, three state senators, and three state representatives. In addition, a regional and state prioritization process will rank projects for funding. The TWDB will manage the administration and disbursement of funds and ensure they are used to finance needed water supply projects. Since it was created in 1957, the TWDB has loaned $14.3 billion dollars for water and wastewater infrastructure without a single loan default.

12. How will the funds be disbursed?

Communities and utilities will apply to TWDB for financial assistance, and funds will be disbursed for projects in the state water plan. The TWDB will evaluate and prioritize projects for assistance based on a state and regional process. Many factors will be considered in this evaluation, including the number of people served, the urgency of the project, the ability of the local and regional sponsors to support the project, and the degree of conservation achieved—just to name a few prioritization criteria.

13. How will the SWIFT and SWIRFT work?

The SWIFT allows for more cost-effective water projects, ultimately saving Texas and Texans money on water Money in the SWIFT may be used to provide financial assistance for state water plan projects through the following TWDB programs: the Rural Water Assistance Fund, the Water Infrastructure Fund, State Participation, and the Agricultural Water Conservation Fund, as well as the proposed SWIRFT. The SWIFT can support low-cost financing for projects in the form of reduced interest rates, longer repayment terms, and deferred repayment periods of interest and principal.

14. Can these funds be used to help address the current drought emergencies some communities are facing?

The legislation for these funds outlines several planning requirements and milestone dates. The funds will not be available until March 2015. In the meantime, entities may be eligible for financial assistance through a number of other TWDB programs.

15. Will this program affect groundwater rights?

No. The SWIFT will not affect groundwater rights or other private property rights in any way. Further, the SWIFT will not affect how groundwater conservation districts manage local groundwater supplies.


16. Does SWIFT require that I install a meter on my groundwater well?

No. There is no provision within SWIFT or its enabling legislation that will require landowners to meter their wells.

17. Will this program change how surface water is regulated?

No. Surface water (water from lakes and rivers) is governed by an entirely separate set of statutes that will not be affected by this program.

18. Who benefits from this program?

Texas. Cities, counties, water districts, river authorities, irrigation districts, regional water authorities, and nonprofit water supply corporations across this state are all eligible to use TWDB's financial assistance programs to address implementation of state water plan projects.

To submit comments by September 1, 2014,use the comment form at:

http://www.twdb.texas.gov/swift/form/index.asp

http://www.twdb.texas.gov/swift/form/index.asp

a simple, first-step for reforming dodd-frank

Documents