|
Up to 200 school teachers, parents and children protested outside today’s Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) hearing in North Austin today against a proposed property tax rebate for Valero Energy which would refund up to $93 million in property taxes to the energy giant. The protesters claim that the funds would overwhelmingly come directly from local school district budgets that are already cash strapped due to over $4 billion in cuts to school funding during the last legislative session.
Patricia Gonzalez, Vice President of the Pasadena branch of the Texas Organzing Project (TOP), stated that Pasadena I.S.D. alone would be forced to repay $11.3 million and would lose a huge source of future school revenues. She added that several other refinery companies were waiting to file similar claims if Valero’s is successful. She implored the commissioners to deny the request, as they had in 2009, stating “everyone should pay their fair share.”
Jennifer Sylas of Houston said that HISD would lose $13.3 million from a district budget that has already seen the loss of such critical programs as buses, books for each individual student, and one on one help for students with dyslexia.
Despite the impassioned pleas from gulf coast residents in attendance, and the clearly audible chants from protesters outside, the three commissioners were unable to comment on this issue as their mandate prevents them from commenting on issues not in the current agenda. As the TCEQ’s general counsel put it, the Valero “matter is not ripe for consideration at this time.”
While their was no pronouncement on the Valero tax rebate issue, their were several other interesting issues up before the commission during the 3+ hour long hearing. One was a hearing request for a “major ammendment” of a Rio Grande Mining Company Texas Land Application Permit which would allow the mining company to directly discharge wastewater into state waters at a “daily average rate not to exceed 360,000 gallons per day” at a facility near Shafter Township in Presidio County. Presidio County Judge, Paul Hunt, argued, via letter, that the permit should be denied due to concerns about arsenic contamination, though the commission will let the hearing go forward.
The other major topic at hand was how the commission should interpret House Bill 2694 in the commissions rules. The law can be interpreted to deny the ability of state agencies to become conflicting parties in litigation, as I understand it. It could then, for instance, limit the ability of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Deparment from suing the Railroad Commission for threatening wilderness areas.
I will keep checking in with TCEQ to see if there are any new developments with the Valero case, or any of these other cases in the future. |
