Squelching a Rumor

I was going to do a quick squelch of the rumors floating around, but started giving more thought to the one about the plant.

It is being said that moving the plant will cost $300,000 to $500,000 or more, and it will cost each person $2,500. It didn't cost that much to erect, so how could it cost that much to move? Also, we have an average of 950 connections in RPMUD. If a charge were made to each home, not to each person, the total would be $2,375,000. Who is pocketing the $2,000,000?

According to Ramirez, the cost of the plant was $760,500. The tank cost $161,800 for material, $31,600 to erect and $1,000 for sterilization. The generator will have to stay with the well, and it costs $73,600, so that amount can be eliminated. The 25,000-gallon pneumatic tank costs $82,400 with $7,000 for installation. The two 700-gpm booster pumps costs $8,600 and installation $4,000. The booster pumps and hydropneumatic tank can be picked up and moved. This is not a complicated facility. Please take a moment to look at it and pick up a copy of the contractor's cost breakdown at the MUD office. Another option would be to sell the components and recoup some of the money.

We have to remember that this plant was erected for the property across the freeway. While you are in the office getting the contractor's report, ask for Bleyl's justification letter to the TCEQ, which goes into great detail about the water needs for the project across the freeway. The directors responsible are denying it is for the I-45 land, even going so far to say that Bleyl, the district's engineer, misstated the reasons in his letter. All of us at that board meeting insisted the board request that Bleyl send another letter to the TCEQ with the correct information. As you might have guessed, that request went nowhere, because the letter was accurate.

Why didn't the developer pay for the project as is the norm? and place it on his land? From the notes in the minutes, it appears that the engineer for the developer did all of the negotiating. We have spent over $850,000 (including engineering, fencing and landscaping) for this project. The old board went ahead with this project before even an acre was sold of the I-45 land. It is still vacant. Isn't that a little risky? Did the developer even have letters of intent? That engineer certainly negotiated a sweet deal for his client. If any of the old directors had checked with the city of Conroe or other MUDs, they might have found that developers pay for the infrastructure. Were these directors so interested in getting tax money that they dove right in without doing their homework? The odd thing is that we would get tax money anyway. This property is in our district. Even if the developer uses the city of Conroe's water line, which is in front of the property, the water bills go through us, and we collect a fee. We weren't going to lose anything. But we paid the price and made the developer happy.