No. Jimmy and Cheryl

NO. _____________________ JIMMY AND CHERYL WILLIAMS, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF ET AL., § § Plaintiffs, § § vs. § GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS § GUADALUPE-BLANCO RIVER § AUTHORITY AND ITS OFFICERS § AND DIRECTORS § § Defendants § ______ TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFFS’ VERIFIED ORIGINAL PETITION AND APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND FOR DAMAGES TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COME NOW, JIMMY AND CHERYL WILLIAMS, ET AL (collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”) complaining of the GUADALUPE-BLANCO RIVER AUTHORITY and its Officers and Directors (collectively “Defendants” or “GBRA”) and show the following: DISCOVERY TRACK 1. Pursuant to Rule 190.1, Tex. R. Civ. P., discovery in this action will be conducted under Discovery Control Plan Level 3 unless an expedited trial is approved. EXPEDITED TRIAL REQUEST 2. While this suit technically does not fit within the expedited-actions process of Rule 169, Tex. R. Civ. P., the importance of the issues raised in this case are far-reaching for the residents, taxpayers, businesses and taxing authorities of Comal, Guadalupe and Gonzales Counties. The destruction or dereliction of the six dams/levees at issue and the de-watering of the remaining four reservoirs not only will severely and irreparably damage the Plaintiffs, but will have a tremendous economic effect on the businesses located in these Counties, as well as the taxing authorities located therein. Literally the millions of dollars which are pumped into the local economy through the recreational activities and property ownership on the Guadalupe River and the millions of dollars collected by the taxing authorities such as the Navarro and Seguin Independent School Districts will be substantially and adversely impacted. Therefore, the Plaintiffs seek an expedited actions process similar to that provided in Rule 169, Tex. R. Civ. P., including discovery and a prompt trial setting within six months. PARTIES 3. Plaintiffs Jimmy and Cheryl Williams, et al, are property owners and stakeholders of real properties located adjacent to the Guadalupe River. Specifically, the Plaintiffs are persons (actual or legal) who own water-front, improved real estate appurtenant to the Guadalupe River and all tributaries and back-waters thereof located in Comal, Guadalupe and Gonzales Counties on the following reservoirs: Dunlap, McQueeney, Placid, Meadow, Gonzales and Wood. A list of all Plaintiffs and their addresses is contained in Exhibit “A” hereto which is incorporated herein. There are currently 295 Plaintiff-owners. 4. Defendant Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority (“GBRA”) is an agency and political subdivision of the State of Texas created under Article 8280-106, Vernon Civil Statutes, with its main office located at 933 East Court Street, Seguin, Texas 78155. GBRA may be served with process by serving its registered agent, Alvin E. Schuerg, 933 East Court Street, Seguin, Texas 78155. 5. The individual Defendants, officers and directors of GBRA, are Kevin Patteson, General Manager/Chief Executive Officer; Jonathan Stinson, Deputy General Manager; Dennis L. Patillo, Chair; Don Meador, Vice-Chair; Kenneth A. Motl, Secretary/Treasurer; Rusty Brockman, Immediate Past Chair; William Carbonara, Director; Steve Ehrig, Director; Oscar Fogle, Director; Ronald J. Hermes, Director; and, Tommy Mathews, II, Director, whose offices are located at 933 East Court Street, Seguin, Texas 78155 and who may be served with process by 2 serving their registered agent, Alvin E. Schuerg, 933 East Court Street, Seguin, Texas 78155, or by serving them at their respective residences, or wherever they may be found. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 6. Jurisdiction is conferred upon this Court by Chapter 2007, TEX. GOVT. CODE, and as a result of the ultra vires acts and omissions on the parts of GBRA’s officers and directors complained of herein pursuant to the Texas Supreme Court holding in Houston Belt & Terminal Railway Co., BNSF Railway Co. v. City of Houston, 487 S.W.3d 154 (Tex. 2016). 7. Venue is conferred under § 15.002, TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE as Guadalupe County is the county in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred, and Chapter 2007, TEX. GOVT. CODE as GBRA’s main offices and the individual Defendants’ offices are located in Seguin, Guadalupe County, Texas. BACKGROUND June 8, 2019 FOLM Annual Meeting: 8. During the Friends of Lake McQueeney Owners’ Association (“FOLM”) annual meeting held on Saturday, June 8, 2019, many of the Plaintiffs and other property owners were informed by Defendant Jonathan Stinson that the failure of the McQueeney levee/dam is “imminent,” as are the failures of all of the remaining four, intact levees (those on Lakes Wood and Dunlap having already failed). FOLM invited not only Defendant Stinson to speak to some of the Plaintiffs and other property owners, but also County Judge Kyle Kutscher and State Representative John Kuempel to inform them “what is being done” with regard to the “imminent” threat of failures of the Lake McQueeney levee and the other three, remaining intact levees. The bottom line from all three individuals’ presentations was that GBRA has no plan in place to repair or replace the existing infrastructure, nor does GBRA have any intention of creating such a plan. In other words, GBRA is basically doing nothing in the face of the looming and catastrophic loss 3 to Plaintiffs and other property owners, despite their statutory duties in this regard, as explained in more detail herein below. 9. County Judge Kutscher informed some of the Plaintiffs and the other property owners that the reduction in real property values along the Guadalupe River will be at least fifty percent (50%) if and when the remaining levees fail. Such a precipitous decline in property values, which has already begun since Defendant Stinson’s June 8, 2019 public announcement, will also adversely affect the Navarro and Seguin Independent School Districts, the largest recipients of ad valorem taxes in the area in the amount of millions of dollars, for which the Texas taxpayers will have to make up. Furthermore, the two failed levees (Wood and Dunlap) and the “imminent” failures of the remaining four levees (McQueeney, Placid, Meadow and Gonzales) will eventually cost the involved communities untold dozens of millions of dollars in damages and lost revenues. 10. Defendant Stinson also told the FOLM group and some of the Plaintiffs that GBRA has owned the six Guadalupe River hydroelectric dams/levees since 1963 when it purchased them “at the end of their useful lives” for less than $4 million, has earned substantial amounts of income from both the hydroelectric power and the water rights, and has made a conscious decision not to maintain those assets’ infrastructures other than to occasionally repair or replace dam doors/gates. According to GBRA’s own Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, “GV Hydro Division personnel are responsible for the operation and maintenance of the generating stations as well as the associated dams, lakes, ancillary equipment and adjacent properties.” 11. In fact, as early as 1969, an internal GBRA memorandum put its officers and directors on notice that they had failed to reserve adequate funds for the repair and/or replacement of the levees, and had no plans to do so in the future. Despite the imminent nature of this situation, GBRA apparently ignored this memorandum and has taken no meaningful action with regard thereto in the five decades since. 4 12. In recent years, GBRA has repeatedly published in its Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports that, “In FY 2017 GBRA began a comprehensive review of all infrastructure it currently owns and/or operates to develop a long-term repair and replacement capital plan. The area of immediate concern was the infrastructure within the Guadalupe Valley Hydroelectric System (GV Hydro). This system is comprised of six low-head hydroelectric dams, power houses and ancillary equipment all of which was originally constructed in the 1920’s and 1930’s. Due to the age of many of the GV Hydro components, a major emphasis on repair and rehabilitation is required.” Despite these public acknowledgements that “a major emphasis on repair and rehabilitation is required,” and despite its statutory duties to maintain this critical infrastructure, GBRA and the individual Defendant officers and directors have willfully and knowingly taken no meaningful action in this regard. They have not set aside funds to cover the cost of repair or replacement, nor will they allocate funds at their disposal for these purposes. 13. GBRA’s commissioned 2013 and 2019 hydraulic engineering studies confirm that GBRA has willfully neglected the conditions of the dams since their acquisition. Now that these 92 year old assets (in reality, Placid dam was completed in 1964) have been intentionally left to deteriorate and their failures are now “imminent,” Defendant Stinson had the audacity to state that GBRA is offering to sell the McQueeney levee to FOLM for $1 and that GBRA would “give FOLM the $1” for the purchase price. Defendant Stinson said that he had a “serious talk with [his] boss,” presumably Defendant and CEO Patteson, about such a proposed sale. However, Defendant Stinson was quick to add that GBRA would not sell or assign to FOLM or to the other Guadalupe River owners’ associations its lucrative water and hydroelectric rights which produce over $60 million in annual income for that governmental bureaucracy. 14. To further illustrate how tone deaf GBRA and the individual Defendants are regarding this critical situation, they recently authorized spending over $7 million obtained from 5 that income for the purchase of a lot and the construction thereon of its new office building and facilities in New Braunfels. Still further, GBRA has donated millions of dollars to non-profit organizations with no corresponding consideration for its obligation to maintain the levees which it owns, or to further any of its statutory responsibilities for this crucial infrastructure.

Load more