a ORDER N0. ~58~1 ARREAL OF TWDB RORULATION ESTIMRTES FOR F:ERR COUNTY FDR REGIONAL WATER RLANNING RURROSES On this the i~th day of Apt^il 1999, upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner' Griffin, the Cour^t unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0, that Fier^r^ County join with the U. G. R. A. in appealing the Texas Water' Development Board population and consumption estimates fot^ Fier^r^ County. COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND NINE COPIES OF THIS REOUEST AND DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT. MADE BY: Fred Henneke MEETING DATE: April 12, 1999 SUBJECT: (PLEASE BE SPECIFIC) OFFICE: County Judge TIME PREFERRED: Consider and discuss appeal of TWDB population estimates for Ken County for regional water planning purposes. EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: (PLEASE STATE REASON) NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT: ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: IF PERSONNEL MATTER -NAME OF EMPLOYEE: County Jude Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance with Title 5, Chapter 551 and 552, Government Code, is as follows: Meeting scheduled for Mondays: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON: 5:00 P.M. previous Tuesday. All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Othce to determine if adequate information has been prepazed for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court Meetings. Your cooperation will be appreciated and contribute towazds you request being addressed at the eazliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Rules Adopted by Commissioners' Court. AGENDA ITEM NO. VL - DLSCUSSION AND APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING CHALLENGING TVVDB POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR KERB COUNTY FOR REGIONAL WATER PLANNIlVG PURPOSES DESCRIPTION OF ITEM: Agenda No. VI Tab No. 7 Subject: Challenging TR'DB population Submitted By: General Manager Projections for%rr County for Regional Water Planning Purposes. A Agenda Date: 3/17/99 Date Prepared 3/IO/99 Gen'1 Mgr Approval: Supporting Information/Eahibits: 1. TWDB's 1997 Consensus Texas Water Plan Population & Consumptive~Yater Demand Forecasts 2. HDR Study pages E~1- E,FS ru"~~~-~ ~AL~i~~ (None) X (See Below) Amount: $ Account Code: Current Budget Balance Requires Transfer of Funds from Account Code # Amt of Transfer:$ Balance in Transfer Account Prior to This Transfer $ CFO Approval Gen? Mgr Approval ..viu.,ii ir.r. Aa~l~,triv11~:1Y1: None COIVIIVIITTEE ACTION: N/.9 Date: N/A ~ovr,~ a1rL JUiyuylAKY J"1'A"1'E;MENTS: The Texas Water Development Board (TR'DB) has published county and City's population estimates through the year 2050. The population projections are to be used by the 16 regions created by SB-1 as the method of determining water needs through 2050. The TWDB numbers track the 1997 HDR Regional Water and Wastewater Study for gerr County through approximately 201 S to 2020. Beyond that point TWDB's estimates begin to fall below the HDR projections In order for the UGRA, City ojgerrville, other cities and Investor Owned Utilities to plan for future water, more specifically for the transfer of surface water from within the Guadalupe Basin, but outside Region "J'; we must be able to justify our needs before we can initiate an inter-regional transfer from Canyon back to gerr County. Attached is the TR'DB "1997 Consensus Texas Water Plan Population and Consumptive Water Demand Forecasts" spreadsheet and the HDR Graph. Follow the top line marked "gerr County"from 1990 - 2050 on the HDR chart and read the municipal totals on the TWDB spreadsheet to compare the projections. In the year 2020, TWDB estimates county population at 58,053 and HDR at 59,500. In the year 2030, TWDB estimates 65,707 while HDR estimates 68,500. In year 2040, TR'DB @ 70,238 and HDR @ 77,000 and 2050, TWDB o~ ~ 1 @ 71,993 and HDR @ 86,669 or a spread of 14,676 or almost the total population of%rrville where UGRA built the surface water treatment plant to serve the City. The purpose of the regional water plans is to develop an estimated growth and water demands for the entire state Permits for new water and funds to construct infrastructure must fall within the population and demand projections. It behooves all %rr County entities to challenge the TR'DB estimates. The first step would be for all %rr County entities to jointly advise TWDB of our concerns. Note the file of TWDB's estimates indicates the estimates are "consensus" estimates The HDR estimates are based on an actual study conducted in %rr County in 1997 in conjunction with TWDB. The later reviewed the study during the development of the work product and approved the study in total The methodology for revision of Population or Demand estimates must follow the TWDB mandated route; Cities and other water users must present their revisions/documentation to the Regional Planning Group, the RPG submits to TWDB staff- who in-turn submits to the TWDB Technical Advisory Committee who submits to the TWDB members for action (approval or rejection). RECOMII~NDED ACTION: lBv Staff 1. That the UGRA call on all other government entities and solicit their support in challenging the TWDB estimates and that each entity submit in writing that entities challenge to the RPG or Plateau Water Planning Group for processing. 000002 1997 CONSENSUS TEXAS WATER PLAN POPULATION b CONSUMPTIVE WATER OEMANO FORECASTS (Voter use in acre-feet per year) PLANNING REGION J KERR COUNTY HOST LIKELY GROWTH SCENARIO City 7990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 [NGRAM Population 1408 1766 207. 2170 2289 2274 225q 1990 Use 244 Below Normal Rainfall Expected Conservation 2B5 300 297 305 295 291 Advanced Conservation 263.. 254 231 238 234 230 Normal Rainfall Expected Conservation 279 293 292 300 290 286 Advanced Conservation 257 247 226 233 227 225 KERRVILLE Population 17384 23792 27548 31018 34030 36376 37285 1990 Use 3492 Below Normal Rainfall Expected Conservation 5330 5832 6254 6747 7131 7267 advanced Conservation 5117 5431 5663 6137 6519 6641 Normal Rainfall Expected Conservation 4317 4721 5038 5413 5704 5805 Advanced Conservation 4157 4382 4552 4955 5216 5304 COUNTY-OTHER Population 17512 17720 20521 24865 29388 31588 32449 1990 Use 2085 Below Normal Rainfall Expected Conservation 2593 2764 3116 3574 3731 3833 Advanced Conservation 2474 2534 2781 3212 3414 3469 Normal Rainfall Expected Conservation 2077 2190 2448 2785 2883 2923 Advanced Conservation 1977 1983 2168 2488 2636 2669 MUNICIPAL TOTALS Po lotion 36304 43278. 50096 58053 65707 70238 71993 se Below Normal Rainfall Expected Conservation 8208 8896 9667 10626 11157 11391 Advanced Conservation 7854 8219 8675 9587 10167 10340 Hormel Rainfall Expected Conservation 6673 7204 7778 8498 8877 9014 Advanced Conservation 6391 6612 6946 7676 8079 8198 MANUFACTURING 28 30 33 36 38 41 S.E. POWER COOLING 0 0 0 0 44 HINING 73 176 122 110 p 103 0 102 0 105 IRRIGATION - Case A 850 823 797 771 747 723 700 LIVESTOCK 382 526 526 526 526 526 526 TOTAL COUNTY VATER USE 7154 Below Normal Rainfall • Expected Conservation 9763 70374 11110 12040 12549 12766 Advanced Conservation 9409 9697 10118 11001 11559 11715 Normal Rainfall Expected Conservation 8228 8682 9221 9912 10269 10389 Advanced Conservation 7946 8090 8389 9090 9471 9573 Municipal use for cities Below normal rainfall wit excludes any wholesale municipal sales h and identified sales to industrial users. expected conservation is the Advanced conservation is implement d i primary municipal water use scenario. e pr or to project co nstructi on. u On January 9, 1998, the workshop was held in Austin, Texas. Based on the suggestions and comments received at the workshop, Board staff developed draft guidelines including specific criteria and data requirements that the Regional Water Planning Groups must use in requesting any changes to the 1997 State Water Plan population and water use projections. The guidelines, criteria, and data requirements were developed to ensure that potential revisions to the consensus-based projections would be addressed in a fair and equable fashion while avoiding the possibility of increasing regional and statewide projection totals to unrealistic magnitudes, and therefore, diminish the value of the regional and statewide water plans. Criteria as specified in these guidelines are to be used for identifying any projections which could be considered for revision. The data requirements are to be used for verifying the need to revise any of the projections identified for consideration based on the criteria. The criteria and data requirements are set forth in [he following guidelines. 2.0 THE PROCESS Any entity or rural area (county other) wishing to have thew respective population and water use projections revised will address their request through their Regional Water Planning Group. If The Regional Water Planning Group agrees with the request, the Regional Water Planning Group will submit the request to the Executive Administrator of the Texas Water Development Board, along with the specific criteria and data requirements as specified in these guidelines. Additionally, the revisions (adjusted numbers or submission of alternative projections) to the consensus-based population and water demand projections for any specific entity or Waal area of a county must accompany the request along with documentation of how the revisions or alternative projections were derived. Board staff will coordinate the review of each request with staff of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department based on specific criteria and data requirements as set forth in these guidelines and will consult with the Regional Water Planning Group and/or their consultant concerning the review of the information. The Executive Administrator of the Texas Water Development Board will respond to the Regional Water Planning Group within 45 days of receipt of the requests. Revisions to the consensus-based population and water use projections must be approved by the Texas Water Development Board. 3.0 POPULATION The Board's staff will aggregate the consensus-based county population projections used in the preparation of the 1997 State Water Plan to derive population control totals for each planning area for each decade (2000, 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, 2050). Any adjustments to the county level population projections (redistribution of [he projected regional population totals among the various counties) must sum to the consensus-based regional total population projections for each decade. Revisions to the consensus-based population projections used in the preparation of the 1997 State Water Plan for city or rural/county other populations of a county will be addressed and revised by the Regional Water Planning Group. A request from the Regional Water Planning 3 Group to revise the consensus-based regional population control totals used in the preparation of the 1997 State Water Plan will be addressed by the Executive Administrator of the Texas Water Development Board after coordination with the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. A request to revise the consensus- based regional control totals must include the proposed revised projected regional population total for each decade (2000, 20 t0, 2020, 2030, 2040, 2050) and the associated revised population projections for each county in the region. All revisions for city, county, and regional population projections will be submitted by the Regional Water Planning Group and must be approved by the Texas Water Development Board. Criteria: One or more of the following criteria must be verified by the Regional Water Planning Group and [he Executive Administrator of the Texas Water Development Board for consideration of revising the consensus-based population projections: a} The can ent population estimate of a county or city is greater than or equal to the year 2000 population projection for that respective county or city which was used in the preparation of the 1997 State Water Plan. b) The population growth rate for a county or city over the latest period of record, beginning in the year 1990, is greater than the 1997 State Water Plan projected growth rate for that county or city over the period 1990 to the year 2000. c) If the Regional Water Planning Group disagrees with along-term population projection (2000 to 2050) for a county or city that was used in the preparation of the 1997 State Water Plan, historical growth rates will be used for comparison purposes and possible verification of changes to the population projections. Historical growth rates for cities must be calculated for the last 30 years of reported population data and the last 40 years of reported population data for counties. Specifically, historical growth rates will be calculated for each ten yeaz period (decade) over the 30 and 40 year periods. d) Identification of areas that have been recently annexed by a city within the regional water planning area. e) Other criteria that the Regional Water Planning Group believe are important for consideration of revisions to the State Water Plan population projections. Data Requirements: The Regional Water Planning Group must provide the following data associated with the identified criteria to the Executive Administrator of the Water Development Boazd for justifying any revisions to the consensus-based population projections that were used in the preparation of the 1997 State Water Plan: 1) Population estimates for counties and cities developed and published by the State Data Center will be used for verifying criteria (a) and (b). 4 2) If an entity disagrees with the State Data Center's most current population estimate for that entity, the Regional Water Planning Group must provide one or more of the following data sets along with the analysis and documentation used in estimating the entity's current population: a) School enrollment information b) Building permits information c) Active residential water service connections d) Appraisal District information e) Other information or current population estimates that the Regional Water Planning Group believe aze appropriate and important. 3) Census counts for cities and counties published by the U.S. Bureau of the Census will be used for verifying historical long-term population growth rates for cities and counties. 4) The population of an area that has been annexed by a city. 5) Other data that the Regional Water Planning Group believe are important to justify any changes to the consensus-based population projections used in the preparation of the State Water Plan. 4.0 MUNICIPAL WATER USE Municipal water use will be defined as residential and commercial water use. Residential use includes single and multi-family residential household water use. Commercial use includes water used by business establishments, public offices, and institutions, but does not include industrial water use. Residentai and commercial water uses are categorized together because they aze similaz types of uses, i.e., each category uses water primarily for drinking, cleaning, sanitation, cooling, and landscape watering. Reported municipal water use data for the period 1982-1991 were used to calculate the annual per capita water use for each city in the preparation of the 1997 State Water Plan. A Regional Water Planning Group may adjust this historical time frame to include more recent annual data subject to the review of this information by the Executive Administrator of the Texas Water Development Board. Criteria: One or more of the following criteria must be verified by the Regional Water Planning Group and the Executive Administrator of the Texas Water Development Board for consideration of revising the consensus-based municipal water use projections that were used in the preparation of the 1997 State Water Plan: a) Any changes to the population projections for an entity will require revisions to the municipal water use projections. b) Errors identified in the reporting of annual municipal water use for an entity. c) Differences identified between the Boazd's calculated per capita water use for a city and the per capita water use calculated by the respective city. d) The consensus-based municipal water use projections include both the expected case and advanced case conservation savings for any specific municipality. Any requests for changing the conservation savings scenarios (expected or advanced) must o~ Apri16, 1999 I have attached several difference studies concerning population estimates for Kerr County. Region J (Plateau Water Planning Group) needs to complete this phase of our regional planning by eazly May, 1999. Hence, any challenges to the population projects must be received by Apri121, 1999, so the formal challenge for the entire region can be approved and sent to the TWDB by May 1, 1999. Judge Henneke, myself and other azea representatives will meet with Mr. Bloodworth from the TWDB on April 7, 1999 to discuss these issues and will present the outcome of this meeting to the full court at the April 12, 1999 Commissioner Court Meeting. Jonathan Letz _; ~ i ~ W U_ ~ > ' I I I I I ~ W ~N LL 3 o _ ~o ~ I w z W i Y a r - Y Z ~ J d IYWQ I i ~ ~d gQ K ~ J s ~ ~ I I I ~ ~ ~ Y j ~ I i i ~i I i ' ~ I ~ I I ~p I ~ ~~ I ~ I i x o ~ N ~ H W H Q O W Z O N Q ~v ow z~ QO a. o QOZ N > - N Q Q O U W O~~ ~ ~a~ ~ O Y ~ a ~ O Q O W N }' u c c `m d c m c w O •-- O ~ 0 x N O O O N ~ ~ I I ~ O O O O O O q O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ 0 O ~ O O ~ 0 0 4 C O ~ et c Q ~ o ~ 8 NOlld'IfldOd £0 ' d ~tJ101 i ~i r. Y N xi OI c~ a W Y OI ~' ~ ~ ~1 ~ p~f ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~p 11 N~ t~i ~i ~ ~ ~ ~y h ~ °If7 r ~ $ !~ ~ ID ~ fr (p bt ~ O~ N @7 Of N O N ®~ ~ G lV ~~ r= pj ~ f.~~. R ~ ~ •-i ~ N O Ol ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~~ ~ Ai~~~~m~ ~ N~ r ~' ~ ol~~~o~~~ ~p ~a ~I m N~ 1~ ~ M 1f1 12f ~ li3 ~ A 11 ;py~[ tp p ~@p yQ shy ~ ~1 W $ d~ N rNp. Rf ~ ~ ~j! ~ O Supt '~i ~ Q~ ~ Q ill C ~I ~ .- v~ ~ ~. V Q Y 7 c~ ~ .~... tC r f~l' ~ ~1 ~ m m ~i ~ ro x ~) ~ o!~ a Nr~~N~ ~ a N O) N N N N i ~I ° ~~ ~ p 0. Oi ~ ~:. 3 m iX7 W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p~~ ~ LL~+ rl ~ C~.. ~. N ^ ~~ ~ N G lC 2 L~ ~ ¢ L 1p ~ N l~I =`~1 N N ~ = L L ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ mm °. ~~! m ~ 'R ~ ~ at O Y ~ ~ u n 31 a 'o ~ V~ ~ x S = ~ ~ ti~ ~ a~ t~ ~ Ol '0~~ 3iJOHci3"131 3-~?(l~t~%~ 4JOe13 '?£:9T b6c?-S'-~'tJ Table 1 ~- Total Population Trends lrrv~T3e : Derr _ __ ~~x~s f~D .` ox~ni~ ~' ~ 1990 Census _ 25,065 __ (1) ._ 36,304 _. _ (1) _ 16,986,335 (r, 1997 Estimate __.__ . _, 28,594 _ ____ (2) v_m__ 40,720 ~ _ _ (3) _ 19,307,376 (3; 2002 Projection 31,172 ~_ (2) 43,553 (3) 21,056,738 (3; .2007 Projection 33,761 (2) 46,318 (3) 22,929,128 (3 !~ 1990-1997 Change 14.1 % 12.2% 13.7% 1997-2002 Change 9.0% 7.0% 9.1 1997-2007 Change 18.1 % 13.7%° 18.8% Sources: (1) U.S. Bureau of the Census (2) Applied Geographic Solutions, Inc. (3) Texas State Data Center, Scenario 1.0 Table 3 Kerr County Projections Year Total- An lo" 81aek Hi ic. Diher 1990 36,304 _ 29,324 ._. :_ 752 _ 5,988 240 1995 39,502. 31;309 817, T,118 258 2000 42,455 32,988 887 8,308 272 2005 45,246._. _ 34,415',... 946 _ 9,607 _ 278 2010 47,980 35,779 980 10,943 278 2015 SfI,798";,. 37,144 _ ..,~ ,; 1,448 ',: _, " _, 12,334 272 2020 53,547 38,448 1,135 13,723 241 2025 55,997.... 38,389 ` . , , '.1 ~'t2 16;182 244 2030 57,779 39,682 1,289 16,560 248 1990-2000 Change 16.9% 12.5% 18.0% ~ 38.7% 13.3% 1990-2030 Chen a 592°k 35.3% 71:496' 1?6i6% 3.3% Kerr County 60.000 i 50,000 40.000 30.000 20.000 I 10.000 0 ®Total ^Angio OBladc i ®Hispanic j ^Other , Source: Texas State Data Center, Scenario 1.0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Year m O ..{ dl d H ~ ( ~ O U a.~ q A J.~ 3 O O ..{ J.~ ro r-1 a H 0 w O -.1 3-i y U m O -,, u ro ~1 .r{ O ei m li -rl J.~ U W .r., H a o d~ aN a 0 ~o -.i N x ~ i.f m rn N rl ro o o m r c ~ r r r n m m ~ o ~ o N o a t +i m i n rn m ~ o m I !1 OI O N f ~1 N l 0 ~ n . i r a o a r~ ( y ~ '-~ I l1 O p rl N ri O N O~ O O 01 V' 41 ~"~ 01 N b N ~O 01 r N rl UI [~ 01 a} ~"~ t0 f~l N f+7 CD OD 1I1 ~ ~o ~n M m r n ~ ~ n o ~ ~ 0 0 N r ~n m N rn m u1 Pl 1(1 N ('1 V~ N N 01 OD CD 01 rl 10 1I1 (+1 M l(1 N m O N1 e-I N ~ ~ r-I r-1 01 01 rl ~n ui m ~ n a o 0 0 o in ~ M N ,~ r ~n .-~ rf m n ui ~o ri ui r-i ui r N1 rl lfl N l~ aD CD O r-1 rl m m 01 V' N 01 V~ O CD .y~ of '-1 rl O O r+1 m ,~ m r o ao rf o r~ c~ r cv ao v ~ ao w ~ ~o m N O~ N O m 01 , ~ m q .,~ b ~ a .H ~ d N ro ~ ~ p ,- -i ro d A ' m b N~ N o w E - i H a i > H•-.~ H ro H - Hac H > ro a a~ G~ o••°+ a o ro o w 0 0 - o o a o ro o m o ~+ ..a -.a m -.~ - ..~ m -.~ H -.a O •.a .-- ~ b 1 d1 N tT ~ d1 d b1 Ol b1 U dl H N 1tl O W Sa N C N~ H W rl H ~ m b H N m H N H W g g ~ ro d dL U ~ U .i ~ C7 ,p rt ? CO ~ a ~ PO Ri '-~ m m-- m~- m-- w-- u~-- m-- 4 ~O 0 L O u • a+ A • a L m • H • M 7 0 F w ~ I_J