Darby Denounces 'Character Assassination' Over Potty Water

It always amazes me how out of touch with the way the world works some people can be. The truth is that all the water San Angelo (and other cities) uses is in effect potty water i.e. water that has previously been used by some other human, animal, plant, etc.. In a broad sense, we are drinking the potty water of dinosaurs and mammoths and the people that were here before Columbus. It's been treated and recycled by natural processes that make it safe enough to drink. Getting closer to home San Angelo's "potty" water (waste water for the P.C. among us) after going through our local treatment plant eventually makes it down stream into the Ivey reservoir, where San Angelo (and several other communities) retrieves it, treats it, and eventually makes more potty water. Truth is that there is not water available that isn't at least part waste water. The question is not whether or not San Angelo will drink waste water. The question is whether or not capturing the waste water before nature has had a chance to do the heavy natural treatment is safe and cost effective and what can be done to ensure and verify that safety and cost effectiveness.

That being said, it's way to early to commit to such an expensive project until some basic research has been done and critical questions answered. Yes, there are cities that are already using recycled water. The long term issues, pluses and minuses are still being tracked, analyzed and debated. The question for the future is not if we will be using recycled, treated waste water but how much of that treatment will be left to nature and how much will be done by man.

I just commented previously with my thoughts on reusing "potty water". Now I want to address a couple misconceptions that are apparent in the mailing Rep. Darby received that was posted.

First off, it's ludicrous to single out two council members on an issue where they are clearly in step with the majority of council in a consensus that's existed for over a decade. Ms Grindstaff and Ms Farmer are very vocal in supporting their positions but no more so than many of the rest of the council. If you replaced everyone on council that shared their perspective on water issues, we would effectively have a completely new council after the elections.

Another misconception is that the city council can put issues such as this before the public for a vote. We expect the to call for a referendum, even a non-binding one, just so the citizens can have input in these type of important decisions. Truth is that there are very few issues the City Council can put before the voters. State law severely limits what councils can put before voters. If it's not specifically spelled out in the Texas Constitution or statutes (like the 1/2 cent sales tax is) or specifically in a city charter (like recall and citizen organized initiatives and referendums are in our charter) then it can't be put on the ballot by the city council. You want to get waste water on the ballot, start a petition drive, get enough verified signatures of registered voters, and it will (must) be put on the ballot. City Council can't do it any other way.

If you're going to complain about positions and actions by city council members, at least complain about all the the members that share in those positions and actions. And if you're going to ask for the council to do something like put something before the voters, please make sure it's something the city council can actually, legally do.

And oh by the way. there are three female council members. Isn't that right Lucy?

No way will I vote for drinking "pottywater" and I don't know anyone that will. I've lived in San Angelo all my 80 years and I've never seen a place that has had so many pipelines put in. We could take all of those pipelines, dig them up and run them to the gulf and remove the salt water and have plenty of water.

Every molecule of water on earth is "potty water." The fatuitousness of the content in the postcard is dismayingly stunning in its ignorance.
The fact the senders did not reveal who they are not only is reprehensible and cowardly, it likely is illegal.
The thuggish inclusion of addresses, phone numbers, and e-mail addresses of two of the three female members of the city council is a bullying tactic every citizen should reject with revulsion.

of the most obvious solution to the problem, and that is to stop wasting large amounts of water on landscapes. It's a lot easier to cut usage then to find more water. Of course, since the city is in the business of selling water...

on the postcard, I'm part of an informal group that has been doing mailings to oppose the Wall ISD school bonds. It's a postcard, if we put all our names on the card there would be no room for anything else, and state law does not require it for mailings that cost less than $500 to publish and distribute, which our mailings don't. Who is supporting this initiative is largely irrelevant, read what they have to say and make up your own mind whether you agree with it, or is the real reason for wanting to know to target them? Have we reached the ridiculous point in this country where who said it is more important than what was said? How they’re funded is also pretty much irrelevant, you either agree with the message or you don't. If it was paid for by a certain party is it going to change the accuracy of what was said, or are we just too lazy to ascertain that sort of thing ourselves without knowing who paid for it? What their ultimate purpose is appears obvious, they don't want to drink their own toilet water, and they sure as heck don't want to pay for the project to make it happen. And no, I didn't have anything to do with this particular postcard and really couldn't care less either way, I live outside the city and have my own water sources.

Why do we have twice a week watering? it's not needed, never has been... When San Angelo was in the BIG drought, it went down to once a week and everyone was ok with that..I don't care what the paper work says, change it back to once a week.!!!!!!!!!! With that being said, maybe we won't have to drink "potty Water" It just makes sense.... P.S. garbage pickup went from twice to once a week. Get my point? Water more important !!!!!!

It is true that all water on earth has been recycled as previous wastewater. Recently, there have been some complaints about the chemicals and unknowns that would be in this purified wastewater. Isn't that what the purification process is supposed to do... remove all of these impurities and make it a highly purified drinking water even better than bottled water? Could this purified wastewater be even safer and tastier than what we currently get out of our river?

Mr. Clemens is a wise man.

Once in a while I experience some delirium and give some consideration to moving back to San Angelo. Then sanity kicks in and I do a mental CTL-ALT-DELETE to flush that notion. Many of the people there are beyond marvelous and I love them, but I have lived in too many other places to ever think that is where I would be most happy. The place has significant chinks in its armor.

Having said that, were I ever to give in to such a lapse in logic, I would certainly do things like xeriscape. I would maintain a wee bit of greenery in the back yard so the dogs could do their business in a setting more to their liking, but I would water this greenery with grey water. I would recycle to the fullest extent possible there. I would at least give consideration to augmenting my use of electricity with solar sourcing.

I would try to have a minimal environmental impact. The area is, after all, at best semi-arid. I really don't care whether folks think the heating of the planet is being caused significantly by us primates (I happen to think we ain't helping one bit), but we all have to deal with the result. San Angelo in the best of times has been on the edge of a desert, and if things continue to go the way some pretty smart folks think, things will only get worse.

Food for thought, folks.

Expat: I have also lived in many different states and cities. I, like many good San Angelo people, would never live anywhere else. This is the best city in the State of Texas. We do live on the edge of the Chihuahuan desert, and it does continues to encroach on us as it moves east. San Angelo leaders will find a water source and solve this problem. It doesn't happen overnight. And many here would do as you say, xeriscape, small yard, grey water, etc.. However, it is very expensive to do those things and many here are on limited budgets. But as I drive around this wonderful town, many people are making the effort. San Angelo will survive as the best city in Texas......BAR NONE!

I have drunk Wichita Falls and Big Sprig tap water several times this last year and I'm still up and running. In fact, both cities have much better tasting water than Angelo.

About three years ago a friend of mine told me that he had called a member of the city council and asked about holding ponds for capturing runoff from the red arroyo . My friend told me that the council member thought he was crazy . Well i'd sure like the city to try that idea before we resort to drinking sewer water , it may be safe , but it doesn't sound right . Ever since then , when ever it rains i have made it a point to go to the bridge on south Bryant and looked at all the precious water going down stream . It doesn't take much rain to get it going . The city should consider the cost of this before they lay down another gazillion dollars on yet another pipe line to the moon project .

The Red Arroyo is a drainage system for municipal storm water runoff. This water would contain untreated raw sewage from manhole overload, pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals like LEAD, garbage and street waste, E. coli, dog feces, and the list goes on and on. When it is allowed to travel down the Concho to Lake Ivie, it receives considerable natural degradation and dilution, so it is not as hazardous as a water source. Straight out of a retention pond would be very, very dangerous.

By some accounts the city is the greatest waster of water. Some reports have stated "lost water" at greater than 25%. These leaks go unnoticed for years. Repairs are made only when there is a gusher! If we "develop" a new water source, it too will be wasted.

SURVEY OF MUNICIPAL WATER LOSS PRACTICES IN
TEXAS
http://www.twdb.texas.gov/publications/reports/contracted_reports/doc/2003483511.pdf

"Economic Level of Leakage (“ELL”):
This is a calculation based on the cost of reducing leakage. It is the theoretical
level at which the cost of leakage reduction meets the cost of the water saved
through leakage reduction. These costs include not only the cost of producing
water but also the avoided cost of replacing the water. "

The telling line here is "These costs include not only the cost of producing
water but also the avoided cost of replacing the water. " in our case its many millions of dollars to replace 25% or about 2 million gallons per day lost.

We are drinking that water any way , with all that good stuff added to enhance the taste . It all comes down to what is less costly .

Take the treated water, and send it to Nasworthy where it can dilute. We could be doing that with our current treated water but it goes down the river to be used as water for crops. Otherwise we can pipe it to OC Fisher to just wait until we need it. Just MHO.

“Don’t ever take seriously any piece of literature that you get where they (the authors) don’t care enough about their issue to sign their name,” Darby said. “They should (have) signed their names to it, tell you who is supporting this initiative, and how they’re funded, and what their ultimate purpose is.”

“This is character assassination. I’ve been victimized by it. I know Carmen (Dusek) and Andrew (Graves) have also been victimized by behind-the-back innuendos and references that they don’t have a chance to refute,” Darby said.

Mr. Darby, I present you this definition; character assassination; a slandering attack, especially one intended to damage the reputation of a public or political figure.

I read the image of the card in the article above, and I must have missed the character assassination.

Just my opinion. Have a great day!