Community Advisor Panel (CAP) Meeting on 23 January 2006

The CAP members reviewed and discussed (page by page) the BRA draft copies of the residential and commercial Shoreline Management Guides.  The group approved a list of fifteen recommendations to be submitted to the Authority.  Authority representatives Mike Itis and Michael McClendon were present at the CAP  meeting.  Their comments and interpretations in response to CAP question was very helpful to the CAP members.  The CAP recommendations will be posted on this site next week and should be published in the 27 January issue of the Lake Country Sun newspaper.

The Authority provided the CAP members copies of the Analysis Methods, a Data Chart and three basic maps in color showing the findings of the Boat Load Study.  The study was discussed briefly. The material presented is now on the BRA web site (See Headlines above)..

Kerry Groves, the CAP Presiding Officer submitted his resignation.  In summary, Kerry felt that he had not successfully communicated with the BRA, had not completed his objectives and that someone else must take over the CAP leadership position.  Kerry indicated that he could make better use of his time doing other things.

Monte Land, the president Possum Kingdom Lake Association (PKLA) spoke to the group concerning a recent meeting and ongoing phone conversations with Steve Peña,
the chairman of the BRA Board of Directors. Mr. Peña had asked about the CAP during their first meeting and they entered into a discussions concerning the capability and logic of the PKLA to representing all the interests of the Possum Kingdom community.  No BRA or CAP decisions or commitments have been made concerning the CAP and or the PKLA future relationship(s) with the Authority that we know of at this time. Michael Mathews of  Lake Country Sun has been in contact with the BRA and a news article should be in 27 January Issue of the newspaper.  Stay tuned for "Late Breaking News"

Community Advisor Panel (CAP) Meeting on 11 February  2006

The CAP members approved a list of 17 recommendations for the proposed Shoreline Management Guide and a resolution recommending dissolution of the CAP and recommending continuation of efforts in public communication with Possum Kingdom residents through the Possum Kingdom Lake Association.  The CAP  recommendations and resolution are shown below.
Recommendations from the Community Advisory Panel
to the Board of Directors of the BRA Shoreline Management and Customer Guide.

 Recommendation #1

Residential Section, Definitions, page 3  Major repair – this item is too broad. 
The committee recommends a more specific definition to this item.  Some of the specifications can be interpreted in a variety of ways.  For example but not limited to due to structural damage can be interpreted differently depending upon the frame of reference.  The other concern is results in the addition, replacement of upgrading of any component of the electrical system or infrastructure this phrase lends it to a wide variety of interpretation.  The committee understands the practice of the authority but also recognizes that this statement is too broad and too open to interpretation.
Recommendation #2
Residential and Commercial Sections, several locations, one instance – page 4, safety hazards
At the sole discretion of the Brazos River Authority – the community advisory panel believes that this terminology is tyrannical toward lease holders and gives the impression that lease holders would lose their right to question or litigate concerns.  It is realized by leaseholders that the authority has the ability to use its discretion to control circumstances but by using the term “sole discretion” the authority is choosing to be oppressive.
Recommendation #3
Residential Section, 1.6 and 4.8
1.6 in regards to lake levels – if the leaseholder is not allowed to move the boat dock into an area for usability purposes, then the leaseholder should not be charged for the lease during the time that the dock is not usable due to the level of the lake.  If the authority is not going to allow docks to be moved when the level is low then the authority should not charge a lease fee during that time for the dock.
4.8 is the same concern
Recommendation #4
Residential Section, 2.2
General aviation liability insurance - the community advisory panel understands that there is not “general aviation liability insurance” perhaps it should be listed as “property insurance”.  It is recommended that the legal department addresses this issue.  
Recommendation #5
Residential Section, 4.6, Construction Standards
C. & F.  – descriptions in these two sections are confusing and difficult to understand.  It is recommended that the floatation device be articulated so that the leaseholder can understand the authority’s position.
Recommendation #6
Residential Section 18.1, Z
Landings and take offs – the defining of the prohibited activity does not allow for emergency landings of medical personnel, emergency personnel and etc… In Residential 1.5 the document clearly states the authority’s position – section 18.1 Z does not address this provision.
Recommendation #7
Commercial Section, 1.3
Assignment of lease – the authority states the requirement of a current financial statement for obtaining a commercial lease.  The committee believes that the requirement of the financial statement does not assist the authority in determining the business practices of the lessee.  If the authority wishes to determine what type of lessee the tenant will be the other required documents are sufficient and better suited for the assessment.
Recommendation #8
Commercial Section, 1.6
General liability insurance – the requirement of general liability insurance in an amount specified from time to time by the authority is too ambiguous and too unpredictable for business owners.  There has been an indication that the authority would have the right to settle cases on the tenant’s behalf and this also would not be an acceptable practice. 
Recommendation #9
Commercial Section, 4.8
Expansion of existing commercial facilities – it is the advisory groups’ position that any expansion of an existing commercial facility would require the expansion to meet all present code, construction standards, and directives but not the entire facility.  <> 
Recommendation #10
Commercial Section, 4.1
Encroachment – the advisory’s position is that the BRA be held responsible along with the present property owner in relation to an encroachment that was previously approved to that assignee.  Both parties (current owner and BRA) should be held liable for expenses to correct the encroachment. <> 
Recommendation #11
Commercial Section, 5.1 D
 Lockers & refrigerators – Refrigerators are not addressed in the document.
Recommendation #12
Commercial Section, 5.1 G & H
Modifications to on water facilities – modifications may be made to the dock after a written request of the commercial facility owner is submitted and approved by the BRA.  
<>Recommendation #13
Appendix A, page 8, #22
Legal proof – this term is hard to understand as written.
Other Collective Recommendations #14 - 17
General Comments about the Documents
Allowances for disputes – the document does not specify any opportunity for mediation for disputes and consideration as to how disputes will be handled.
Grandfathered items – any items, situations, and circumstances previously grandfathered by the BRA should survive lease changes.
Changes addressed in both documents – any changes suggested by the panel should be reviewed in both residential and commercial documents.  Failure to note the suggestion in both documents does not indicate a lack of desire for that section – just a respect of consideration of time and effort.  Changes should be reviewed for both documents.
On water and off water facilities – Types and location of facility should be clarified within the document.  Specification is needed to know if the rule relates to on or off water facilities.

Resolution to Brazos River Authority passed by the BRA Community Advisory Panel

The CAP members present at the meeting approved by a unanimous vote the following resolution:

The Possum Kingdom Community Advisory Panel (CAP) an entity created by the Board of Directors (BOD) of the Brazos River Authority to receive and communicate information regarding the Authority’s management and administration of Possum Kingdom Lake hereby recommends to the Possum Kingdom Committee the following resolution at its April 11, 2006 meeting: 

  “BE IT RESOLVED that the Community Advisory Panel hereby recommends to the Brazos River Authority dissolution of the Community Advisory Panel, as evidenced by a majority vote wherein Community Advisory Panel members resigned their positions; and

“BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Community Advisory Panel recommends to the Brazos River Authority continuation of efforts in public communication with Possum Kingdom residents through the Possum Kingdom Lake Association.