Connect with us

Texas

Opponents tell North Texas leaders to drop any plans for ‘flawed’ Marvin Nichols Reservoir

Published

on

Opponents tell North Texas leaders to drop any plans for ‘flawed’ Marvin Nichols Reservoir


PITTSBURG – Roughly 200 people descended upon a regional water meeting in northeast Texas on Wednesday afternoon with “Stop Marvin Nichols” signs, custom T-shirts and handwritten speeches.

Nearly 40 attendees looked officials in the eyes and repeated the same sentiment: The proposed Marvin Nichols Reservoir project needs to be removed from all future water plans.

The meeting, lasting about four hours in Camp County, was specially called by the Region D water planning group whose jurisdiction includes the land that would be used to build the 66,000-acre reservoir to pump water more than 100 miles to North Texas. Some Region C water officials, who are part of the group calling for the project that would benefit the North Texas area, were also in attendance.

At one point, Region D chairman Jim Thompson sat beside Region C chairman Kevin Ward at the front of the room.

Advertisement

Breaking News

Get the latest breaking news from North Texas and beyond.

Ward talked about Marvin Nichols being just one of the many alternatives that leaders are looking at to meet water needs in North Texas and said having the project in the plan isn’t a “green light” to start developing but rather a placeholder for if it’s needed in the future. He noted the permitting process could take decades to complete.

‘Nowhere to go’: Northeast Texans beg officials to drop Marvin Nichols Reservoir plans

He said he doesn’t know of any other strategy in the state that’s had so many studies and analysis completed, calling the reservoir a “lightning rod for the entire state of Texas.” He said the voice of northeast Texans has been heard far and wide.

“All these years it’s been heard in the halls of the Legislature down in Austin, it’s been heard by your state representatives here, by your senators and by those members out there in Region C as well,” Ward said. “We’ve heard it so you’ve got to believe that if we thought there was another way to do what we’re trying to do right now … we’d certainly latch onto it as fast as we could.”

Advertisement
Jim Thompson, the chair of the Region D planning group, listens to Region C chair Kevin Ward address a meeting of the North East Texas Regional Water Planning Group D regarding the proposed Marvin Nichols Reservoir on Wednesday, Oct. 30, 2024, in Pittsburg, Texas.(Smiley N. Pool / Staff Photographer)

Much of the crowd was attentive but unsympathetic. Thompson responded later in the meeting, reiterating that he is willing to work together to find additional supplies in the Region D area that could help Region C.

“That does not, in my opinion, in any way, form or fashion mean that I’m going to agree to Marvin Nichols because I never am,” Thompson said. “It’s a flawed project. It should not go forward. It should be removed from the state water plan.”

A majority in the room applauded Thompson’s comment. The men eventually shook hands before Ward took a seat in the audience and Thompson presided over the 38 public comments made about the plan.

For decades, Region C water planners in North Texas have suggested the reservoir is one of the best solutions to quench Dallas-Fort Worth’s growing water needs that continues to increase as its population continues to grow.

Discussions around the project have occurred since the 1960s when it was first included in the state water plan but are being revamped as the regional groups prepare their latest plans, which are completed every five years. Tensions began boiling in the last 20-some years as the need for water in North Texas became even more apparent with the population boom.

Advertisement
What the draft feasibility report on Marvin Nichols Reservoir says, how to submit feedback

Many, including Ward, said Wednesday’s meeting drew the largest crowd of any Marvin Nichols meeting they’d been to in the last couple decades.

Proponents for the manmade lake have recently called for it to be online by 2050 and a recent estimate put the cost at $7 billion. The Texas Water Development Board recently completed a review of the project, concluding that it was feasible.

Those opposed to the project – including residents in portions of Red River, Franklin and Titus counties whose generational land, homes, churches and cemeteries where their family members are buried would be flooded – have spoken out against the reservoir repeatedly, including at a Region C meeting in Arlington at the end of September.

They’ve said the project would destroy their small, rural communities that are made up of blue-collar workers who are the backbone of not only Texas but the U.S. They also say the negative impacts of the project beyond where its footprint would be haven’t been adequately portrayed, including detrimental effects to the Rivercrest ISD and thriving timber industry.

“Here we are again,” Gary Cheatwood Jr., 48, told the water planners. Cheatwood’s family has been in the Red River County community called Cuthand for more than a century and throughout his entire adult life he’s watched his dad, 85-year-old Gary Cheatwood, battle the reservoir plans.

Advertisement

Cheatwood said in the decade or so he’s been speaking at meetings, he typically talks about data and numbers but he chose to switch up his approach Wednesday. Instead, he talked about his dreams of living in Cuthand and a desire of continuing to raise his kids there.

Those hopes are something that can’t be taken from him, he said, adding that he won’t leave. “Amen,” someone from the audience said before people applauded. Cheatwood said the deal was a land grab before anything else.

“I will sit on my land until I’m dead or Jesus comes back, whichever comes first,” he said.

Northeast Texans revamp decades-old fight over proposed reservoir that would benefit D-FW

A handful of other residents in the area that would be drowned agreed that they would be either buried on the land or taken off it in a body bag but giving it up for the reservoir wasn’t an option.

More than a dozen people referred to the project as “thievery,” “theft” or “stealing.” One man called it “interregional imperialism” and a woman compared the fight to David and Goliath.

Advertisement

Though a lot of the public commenters were familiar faces who have been traveling to meetings across the state for decades, others said they recently learned about the project and felt compelled to speak up.

Tawnya Cagle, 50, said her family moved from Rockwall to northeast Texas in 2017 and had never heard of the Marvin Nichols Reservoir.

“There are people who are literally pouring their foundations right now and they know nothing about this,” she said. “So imagine our surprise when we came out here.”

Now, as she’s learned more, she’s joining the movement to call for the project to be scrapped.

“It’s about our kids and our grandkids and our legacy we want to leave them,” Cagle said.

Advertisement

Some Region D members also voiced concerns.

One called for more active water conservation in Dallas-Fort Worth, comparing it to not buying more cattle if there’s not enough grass. Another called for Region C to look elsewhere for water, like the Gulf of Mexico.

Robert Hurst, of Delta County, said he grew up in North Texas so he appreciates the water needs but wanted to make one thing clear.

“Frankly, it’s growing out our way too,” he said. “We need the water, too. Y’all are not the only ones.”

He said his county is also planning what it’s going to do to handle the expanding population.

Advertisement

“We’re not trying to be ornery but we’re trying to self preserve and we all need our land, we need our water and we’re going to be seeing the growth you’re seeing also,” Hurst said.

Marvin Nichols Reservoir has made headlines for decades. Who is the namesake?



Source link

Texas

8 convicted of terrorism charges in Texas immigration center shooting sentenced to decades in prison

Published

on

8 convicted of terrorism charges in Texas immigration center shooting sentenced to decades in prison


FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) — A demonstrator who shot and wounded a police officer outside a Texas immigration center last July 4 was sentenced to 100 years in federal prison Tuesday, while other protesters accused of having links to antifa were given multiple decades in federal prison.

Benjamin Song was convicted of attempted murder last March after prosecutors say he opened fire and wounded a police officer at the Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado.

The seven other protesters sentenced Tuesday received prison terms ranging from 30 to 70 years.

“Our issue with this case has always been this isn’t a bunch of terrorists. This is a bunch of kids and young adults who really have a really big heart and really wanted their voice to be heard,” Philip Hayes, Song’s attorney, said outside the federal courthouse in Fort Worth. “It was never intended that anybody get hurt. It was never intended that any shots would be fired.”

Advertisement

He said his client would appeal the sentencing.

“Song, aside from this day, has had an impeccable life. A former Marine. A good student,” Hayes said. “He had a lot of good qualities that were just ignored. The judge went ahead and gave as much as he could.”

One of the defendants, Daniel Sanchez Estrada, was convicted of corruptly concealing a document and conspiracy to conceal documents. Others pleaded guilty to providing material support to terrorists rather than take their case to trial.

Prosecutors say the eight are members of antifa, a decentralized anti-fascist organization that has become a target of the Trump administration. They have denied any affiliation and maintain they attended the demonstration to show support for immigrants inside the detention center.

President Donald Trump last fall signed an executive order designating antifa a domestic terrorist organization, even though there is no domestic equivalent to the State Department’s list of foreign terror organizations.

Advertisement

Critics warn the case could have wide-reaching impact on protests given that organizations operating within the U.S. are supposed to be protected by First Amendment free-speech rights.

Short for “anti-fascists,” antifa is not a single organization but rather an umbrella term for far-left militant groups that confront or resist neo-Nazis and white supremacists at demonstrations.

Last week, federal prosecutors charged 15 people with impeding the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in Minnesota. They claimed the demonstrators were members of antifa who conspired against the federal government to block arrests and deportations by setting up blockades around government buildings and throwing chunks of ice at federal vehicles, among other actions.

Marcelo reported from New York.

A free press is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy.

Advertisement

Support trusted journalism and civil dialogue.




Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Texas

Paxton, Trump adviser’s org win bid to block immigration rule

Published

on

Paxton, Trump adviser’s org win bid to block immigration rule

Audio recording is automated for accessibility. Humans wrote and edited the story. See our AI policy, and give us feedback.

A federal judge in Texas blocked a Biden administration rule on Monday that allowed immigration judges to indefinitely close a deportation case against immigrants on the same day Texas sued to stop the rule.

The rule, which was adopted in 2024, allowed immigration judges to close a deportation case after hearing arguments from the federal government and the immigrant in deportation proceedings, especially if the person could qualify for a benefit that allows them to stay in the country legally.

But on Monday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas in Wichita Falls to block the rule with U.S. Judge Reed O’Connor, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush.

The lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice was also co-filed by America First Legal Foundation, an organization founded by Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to President Trump who has focused on ways to limit both legal and illegal immigration to the country. America First Legal Foundation also previously filed various lawsuits representing Paxton against the Biden administration’s immigration policies, which helped derail President Biden’s immigration agenda in his lone term.

Advertisement

In this latest complaint, Paxton’s office said in the 43-page lawsuit that the Biden-era rule “effectively grant(s) indefinite amnesty to aliens illegally present in this country.”

Lawsuits usually take several months to years to settle, but in this case O’Connor ruled late on Monday in favor of Texas after the Department of Justice filed its response saying it agreed with Paxton’s office.

Paxton’s office and the DOJ did not respond to immediate requests for comment.

President Trump, in keeping with his campaign promise, has cracked down on immigrants, using many of the federal government’s resources to limit immigration and fast-track deportations, including undocumented people and others who were allowed to be in the U.S. by previous administrations.

O’Connor has been known as conservative leaders’ favorite judge because he has routinely ruled in favor of Paxton, who has strategically filed lawsuits against the Obama and Biden administration.

Advertisement

The fast-paced end to the rule echoes a similar maneuver conducted by the DOJ and Paxton’s office last year, when the federal agency sued Texas over a law allowing undocumented students to qualify for lower tuition rates at public universities. Hours after the suit was filed, Texas also asked Judge O’Connor to find the law unconstitutional, which he did.

After the law was overturned, legal experts said a state working with the federal government so closely for the swift overturning of a state law was unusual and raised questions about collusion.

The quick resolution to the case late on Monday was heavily criticized by immigration law experts.

“This is madness! Deliberate collusion with a federal judge to rapidly erase regulations without any input from affected parties,” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow with American Immigration Council, a group in Washington, D.C., that advocates for immigrants. “It’s clearly an unlawful act by all, and now litigants will have to seek to intervene in the already-completed lawsuit to overturn his actions.”



Source link
Advertisement
Continue Reading

Texas

US opens probe into fatal Tesla crash into Texas home

Published

on

US opens probe into fatal Tesla crash into Texas home


A U.S. agency on Monday ​said it is ‌opening a new special crash investigation into ​the June 19 ​fatal crash of a ⁠Tesla Model 3 ​that struck a Katy, ​Texas, home allegedly using an advanced driver assistance ​system that fatally ​injured a 76-year-old woman.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending