Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Interlocal Agreements Water topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Court continues talks with city over interlocal water agreement, flags ordinance and ownership questions
Summary
Commissioners reported the interlocal agreement with a nearby city expired; city representatives say an ordinance may restrict new meters outside city limits, and county staff said ownership of water infrastructure near the sports complex is unclear; court voted to continue negotiations and seek documentation.
Dimmit County commissioners on Jan. 13 placed the interlocal water agreement with a neighboring city on continued discussion after the agreement expired in December and city attorneys raised unresolved water and ordinance issues.
County staff said the city indicated that an ordinance limits new water meters outside its corporate limits and that the city had requested variances for some facilities. The county’s project manager said that the water infrastructure (a well and tank) appears to sit on county property but the city later reported public records showing private ownership; commissioners said they would obtain documentation to resolve ownership and cost issues.
The interlocal agreement impacts planned facilities — the sports complex and golf course — where commissioners had expected city cooperation for water service and for shared infrastructure. County commissioners voted to continue negotiations and to seek clear documentation, including a review of property ownership and any relevant city ordinance that would affect new meters or charges.
Next steps: the county will gather property and appraisal records and continue talks with the city and its attorney to resolve water access and billing issues before finalizing any interlocal agreement.
