FAQS

Settlement Frequently Asked Questions
PLEASE NOTE:     This general information is provided for the convenience of WPOA members, and is not intended as legal advice. Members or other persons with specific questions should refer to the text of the Settlement Agreement and/or consult with legal counsel.
If you have a question please send it to:  medina_lake@mac.com
*************************************************************
Does the Agreement give BMA the power to regulate septic systems around the Lake?
• The Agreement does not give BMA power to regulate Medina Lake. We were adamant that we do not acknowledge that BMA has any regulatory authority over the lake.
• The septic provision gives BMA 6 months to challenge an inspection if it thinks it's bogus.   This is a one-time deal, involving the initial inspections -- not an ongoing power to question inspections. After 6 months it's no longer an issue.
• Further, the Agreement makes clear that the septic inspections are performed by the county or an engineer chosen by the member, not BMA. If the inspection is invalid, for example, if the person conducting the inspection is not licensed, or if the inspection is obviously inaccurate or unreliable, the arbitrator can order another inspection.
• If BMA challenges an inspection report and the arbitrator finds that the challenge is not warranted, BMA must pay the costs.
• We anticipate that the challenges will be few, if any.
When the level of the lake is at 1060 and you live on a man-made channel and cannot access the lake without crossing someone's property are you considered to be waterfront property?
• No, in that situation the person would not meet the definition of "waterfront property owner" or be eligible to participate in the Settlement Agreement.
 What happens if I don't take the Agreement?
• The settlement was carefully worded not to make any concessions about the rights of any waterfront property owner who does not sign the Agreement.
• Your rights remain the same as they are now.
• You must consider the known costs of taking this Agreement against the potential costs of later actions by BMA.
Why should I give BMA a deed to my property?
• BMA already has deeds to virtually every foot of water front property from the Dam to Red Bluff Creek. It can be argued that their rights consist of only an "easement to flood". Some deeds have better language than others.
• Other arguments can be made to prevent BMA attempts at control, but all will ultimately be decided in court or by an agreement such as this.
• The terms and cost of this Settlement are very well spelled out.
• The cost of further litigation could run to probably tens of thousands of dollars.
Why should I trust BMA to honor their part of this Agreement?
• First of all, this agreement was written by our attorney so every word and comma were carefully considered by our lawyer and the WPOA Board.
• It was reviewed by several other lawyers and real estate people for content and to avoid any unintended consequences.
• Finally, it is not only a contract, but will also have the force of a court order when it is signed by the judge as a consent judgment.
I live in Avalon and have what I consider to be good deed language, why should I sign the Agreement?
• The great majority of Avalon deeds only go to the 1084 Contour. For a rather minimal cost; you will gain complete control over the land between the 1084 and 1072 Contours.
• Not only that, you will have record ownership and control in the Lakefront down to the waters edge, which becomes important in times of low lake levels.
• Furthermore, for participating Members it puts an end to the threats of an "open beach" policy that some have urged on BMA.
• Also the Agreements divides control of the area in front of the many Avalon road easements between the adjoining waterfront property owners. This will officially end access to the water down these easements which will end at the 1084' Contour on the Avalon plat.
Why, in the light of an earlier favorable ruling in the courts, have we conceded that BMA has anything to say about docks?
• We have not made any concessions about BMA's alleged power to control docks. Instead, the Agreement grants participating Members an exemption for one dock, pier and/or ramp per lot from any fees that BMA might wish to try to impose. There is no agreement to pay fees on non-exempt docks, piers or ramps, and the Agreement makes clear that the participating Member does not concede that BMA has power to regulate the lake outside its territorial boundaries.
• Furthermore, the Agreement establishes that as far as BMA is concerned, docks are the responsibility of the waterfront property in front of whose property it is located.
My house and septic system are above the 1084.   If I join this agreement do I need to have a survey done from 1084 to 1072 if I plan on fencing the flood easement?
• A survey would only be necessary if you have a building/structure below elevation 1084 or if your lakefront lines have to be modified to avoid cutting a neighbor off from the lake.
If I have not added any structures below the 1084 may I use my existing survey
• Yes, if it shows the present structures below the 1084.
Does an "opt in participant" need to continue to be a WPOA member after the first year (2005) when they are required to be a current 2005 WPOA member in order to qualify to opt in?
• No. Subsequent years will be a non-requirement.
Will the WPOA dues remain at $100 for subsequent years?
• Probably not, it will depend on the needs of the organization. Dues were raised for 2005 to help pay existing legal fees from the court and mediation. When the legal fees are paid in full there will only be minimal fees, i.e., mailings, occasional meetings, etc.
If I don't have a structure or septic below elevation 1084 do I need a septic inspection?
• No.
How do I find a licensed septic tank inspector and surveyor?
• The WPOA website will post lists of each beginning in January, or you can use your own referrals as long as they are licensed/certified by the appropriate agency.
Will WPOA remain in existence or dissolve?
• There is no reason to dissolve. The corporation can continue but may do so in an "inactive" status. If there is an issue which the WPOA can be of assistance then the organization will be in place. Also, the WPOA probably cannot dissolve until all liabilities are paid, i.e., legal fees. Also there needs to be the organization to elect/appoint members to the BMA-WPOA committee.
What is the deadline for me to sign the Settlement Agreement?
• March 1, 2005. WPOA recommends that the paperwork be ready February 1, 2005 or soon thereafter so that any necessary tasks be in order.
What if BMA conveys it's interest to another entity?
• "Any conveyance by BMA of its interest in Contour Land or Lakefront, including any transfer by BMA of its rights to any successor or assign, shall be subject to a Member's Perpetual Easement." In other words, your rights will not be affected by such a conveyance.
What about the legal document preparation?
• You are free to use any attorney you like. WPOA's attorney, Steve Rogers, has offered to prepare the legal documents for Members for a flat fee of $500, half of which will be used to retire WPOA's existing legal debt.
How do I sign up for the workshops that begin in January?
• Check on the website under workshops and see if your area has a contact host. If so, contact the host.
• If not, e-mail medina_lake@mac.com and give your name, phone number and your subdivision/area and someone will contact you.
What if I don't see my area/subdivision listed?
• If your area/subdivision is not listed, e-mail medina_lake@mac.com and give your name, phone number and your subdivision/area and someone will contact you.
• You might want to consider contacting neighbors to form a workshop in your area. WPOA Board members will attend your meeting to answer questions regarding the settlement agreement and procedures to opt in.
I thought that the courts already held that BMA can’t regulate Medina Lake.
• The short answer is yes and no. The bottom line is that the courts have not definitively decided whether BMA can exercise its powers as a water control and improvement district over lands that are outside its boundaries, but in which it has a property interest.
• In the Wallace case decided in 1981, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that BMA could not enforce Texas water quality laws outside its boundaries as a “local government” under Chapter 26 of the Texas Water Code. This chapter of the Water Code prohibits discharges of waste or pollutants into or adjacent to any water in the state, and is normally enforced by state regulators. BMA v. Wallace, 619 S.W.2d 551 (Tex. Civ. App.—San Antonio 1981, writ ref’d n.r.e.). The particular statute at issue, Tex. Water Code § 26.124 (now found at § 7.351), authorized local governments to file suit and seek penalties against polluters. The court held that this statute gives local governments the power to sue only for water quality violations within their boundaries. The court did not consider whether BMA could regulate the lake based on its powers as a water control and improvement district under Chapter 51 of the Texas Water Code.
• In the Medina Lake Protection Ass’n case, the court of appeals affirmed the Medina County district court’s declaration that BMA “may not enforce its regulations except within its boundaries and over property which is owned by [BMA] or in which [BMA] has an easement or other property right.” Medina Lake Protection Association v. BMA, No. 8399, 38th District Court, Medina County, Texas, aff’d in part, 640 S.W.3d 778 (Tex. Civ. App.—San Antonio 1982, writ ref’d n.r.e.). BMA owns a property interest in much of the Contour Land, whether it’s only an easement to flood as WPOA contends, or is something more as BMA believes. Thus, the court’s opinion does not by its terms bar BMA from regulating these lands as a water control and improvement district.