Alamo Drafthouse Slaughter Lane
'Chronicle' Too Gullible
RECEIVED Mon., May 16, 2005
Dear Editor,
Your article covering Texas Senate Bill 1858 inexplicably repeats developer attorney/lobbyist Dan Wheelus' assertion that "no one has ever justified that the 15 to 25% impervious cover limits were necessary to preserve and protect the recharge and contributing zones on Barton Springs" [“Senate Bill Threatens Local Water Quality Standards,” News, May 6]. In fact, the one person testifying at the SB 1858 hearing with the best credentials to opine on that topic – environmental engineer Lauren Ross – submitted data to the Senate Committee showing the scientific consensus on the necessity for these restrictions. Why did your reporter choose to rely on a developer lawyer as the sole source of information about science rather than reporting on contrary information provided by a scientific expert?
SB 1858 is nothing more than an effort to take decisions regarding water quality protection standards away from local voters who are motivated to protect their environment and put them under the control of a state agency beholden to polluter lobbyists.
While environmentalists sometimes become elected to City Councils, it is chemical company lobbyists and their ilk who are appointed to run the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. SOS Alliance and many other organizations have long petitioned TCEQ to hold hearings and gather scientific evidence on the adequacy of the TCEQ rules regarding the Edwards Aquifer, but these requests have been wholly ignored. "Scientific" decisions at TCEQ regarding water quality standards are driven by political constraints imposed by lobbyists like Dan Wheelus and their friends in the Texas Legislature. Please dig a little deeper on these issues, and don't allow yourself to be an unquestioning platform for developer lobbyists' assertions about environmental science.
Your article covering Texas Senate Bill 1858 inexplicably repeats developer attorney/lobbyist Dan Wheelus' assertion that "no one has ever justified that the 15 to 25% impervious cover limits were necessary to preserve and protect the recharge and contributing zones on Barton Springs" [“Senate Bill Threatens Local Water Quality Standards,” News, May 6]. In fact, the one person testifying at the SB 1858 hearing with the best credentials to opine on that topic – environmental engineer Lauren Ross – submitted data to the Senate Committee showing the scientific consensus on the necessity for these restrictions. Why did your reporter choose to rely on a developer lawyer as the sole source of information about science rather than reporting on contrary information provided by a scientific expert?
SB 1858 is nothing more than an effort to take decisions regarding water quality protection standards away from local voters who are motivated to protect their environment and put them under the control of a state agency beholden to polluter lobbyists.
While environmentalists sometimes become elected to City Councils, it is chemical company lobbyists and their ilk who are appointed to run the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. SOS Alliance and many other organizations have long petitioned TCEQ to hold hearings and gather scientific evidence on the adequacy of the TCEQ rules regarding the Edwards Aquifer, but these requests have been wholly ignored. "Scientific" decisions at TCEQ regarding water quality standards are driven by political constraints imposed by lobbyists like Dan Wheelus and their friends in the Texas Legislature. Please dig a little deeper on these issues, and don't allow yourself to be an unquestioning platform for developer lobbyists' assertions about environmental science.
Brad Rockwell
