Commission drills down on what disannexation could mean for area water quality

Though the city’s current water quality monitoring system has been in place for an impressive 30 years, changes at the state Legislature mean a change at the city level as well.

Andrew Clamann, who works for the Watershed Protection Department in the environmental monitoring and compliance division, spoke about his program to the city’s Environmental Commission at its most recent meeting. The commission had asked for a briefing in June to address how ongoing water quality monitoring efforts were impacted by disannexation after the passage of Senate Bill 2038. The legislation allows allows property owners to opt out of the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction, or ETJ, removing it from the city’s purview.

As of last month, 51 properties with water quality ponds had been removed from the city’s jurisdiction and seven stormwater controls that had existing violations were transferred to the county. 

Clamann said that the change doesn’t impact his ability to monitor water quality, but it does impact the city’s ability to inspect water quality controls and respond to water quality spills negatively.

In Austin, water quality compliance is governed by the city’s Water Quality Code. Once a property is disannexed, that code no longer applies, and the city can no longer enforce it. However, the Texas Water Code applies to everyone regardless; enforcement just moves out of the hands of the city and to the county or state.

“It doesn’t mean that pollution is now allowed, it just means we have no control or authority over it,” said Clamann.

He explained that the city has a good working relationship with the Travis County’s water quality program and all of the water quality controls are held to the same pollution removal standard, regardless of jurisdiction. 

“The reason why this is on our agenda … is the fact that Lost Creek left the ETJ and there’s a lot of human activity there at Sculpture Falls, just downstream from there,” said Commissioner Dave Sullivan. “I was lying in Barton Creek just on Sunday afternoon with some friends and thinking about this.”

Clamann agreed that there were some losses to the ETJ that were “more poignant to water quality than others,” but affirmed that he had collected downstream data earlier that day, and Travis County would continue to collect data for sites that would be used by the city. 

Commissioner Jennifer Bristol said she hoped that SB 2038 was repealed soon.

“As a taxpayer, I’m not real excited that an investment we made, as a city, then goes away. That really kind of pisses me off,” she said. “I’m actually really surprised at the number. I mean, 51 properties is a lot of properties leaving the ETJ.”

Kiersten Ivy, who is the water quality program manager at Travis County, said her colleagues weren’t thrilled with the change either. She told commissioners that county development staff was now “on high alert” and reviewing all permits. As for water quality monitoring, she has been on the job for five months and just hired another employee, bringing the total number of employees in her department up to two.

“It’s a bear,” said Ivy, who told commissioners that she was out in the field and leaning on the existing city knowledge base as much as possible to cope with the switch. “We’re doing our best and we’re trying to get in front of everything that comes our way.”

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.