We're excited to introduce SOS Environmental Attorney Victoria Rose (and kick off a new MEET OUR TEAM series). Rose has been an integral part of SOS since February 2022. With a deep passion for protecting our environment, Victoria’s work "locks in" with our mission. Her smile is golden, she is sharp as a tack, and her heart is with nature. 

Victoria is the lead attorney for a high profile case against Mirasol Springs which challenges the sprawling development near Hamilton Springs and Roy Creek, threatening several endangered species and the water quality in an extremely sensitive area. I sat down with Victoria to learn more about why she joined SOS and what makes her tick!

Why did you join SOS? I’m excited about SOS’s mission to protect water quality and wildlife through litigation while also working to educate the public. The kinds of cases that I’m getting to work on really remind of me of my initial inspiration for wanting to become an attorney, and its exciting to show up to work everyday.

What is the toughest part of the job? Waiting for a court’s decision in a case; I’m not good at waiting!

What is the best advice you’ve ever received? An elephant is eaten one bite at a time. Remembering this helps me to take huge, overwhelming projects and break them down into manageable tasks so that I don’t get too anxious or overwhelmed to work effectively.

What do you love most about what you do? I love having a job that aligns with my values and where I can work to protect the environment and the people and wildlife living in it. I also love the other people that work at SOS, and their excitement really keeps me going. 

Tell us a surprising or a fun fact about you. In college I worked for a lab that studied grasshopper mice and bark scorpions. Part of my job included collecting scorpions in the desert. We would go out at night with ziplock bags, forceps, and a black light to find scorpions. The scorpions would glow green under the blacklight, and then we would pick them up by the tail with the forceps and toss them in the ziplock bag. I am crazy good at scorpion catching.

Tell us about more about your role as an attorney at SOS, a case you’re working on, and what the ideal outcome is: While I work on a variety of cases, most of my cases center around challenging the issuance of a permit that would harm the environment. So, this includes challenging wastewater discharge permits and other kinds of permits at TCEQ and challenging groundwater production permits at groundwater conservation districts. The biggest case that I’m working on right now is our Mirasol Springs case, we are challenging two groundwater production permits, 1 wastewater permit, and 1 river diversion permit. The Mirasol Springs case also involves some endangered species work with the Texas fatmucket mussel and Pedernales River springs salamander. The ideal outcome of that case is the developer putting the entire parcel into a conservation easement in recognition of the sensitivity and rarity of the ecosystem on and near the proposed development. Alternatively, it would be great to see the development scaled back a lot and for the development to be served 100% by rainwater and beneficial reuse of wastewater. 

Why did you want to become an environmental attorney? I was always interested in becoming an attorney, perhaps from watching too much Law and Order, and I was always interested in the outdoors and nature and science. For a long time I didn’t have a plan to combine these two interests, but my undergraduate environmental law and ecology courses showed me how I could combine my interests and work towards helping people as an environmental attorney, and I have been on that course ever since.

What’s your favorite “Bill Bunchism”? “Pollution delayed is pollution denied.” It helps me to remember that even when cases are tough or take a long time, we are still protecting the aquifer and springs by keeping pollution out of them for the time being.

We're incredibly grateful for Victoria’s hard work and passion for protecting our springs and wildlife. Thank you, Victoria, for everything you do!

At Wednesday's special Austin City Council "Budget" meeting, the City Council first voted on placing 13 proposed amendments to the Austin City Charter on the November ballot. These will appear at the very bottom of the ballot, below votes for Mayor and 5 of the 10 city council seats.  There was 5 minutes of discussion before the vote to call the election.   

Never heard of the proposed city charter amendments?  Or only heard a bit about the proposals to reduce direct democracy by making it harder for citizen petitions for initiative and recall.  That's the basic idea -- minimize public awareness of these moves that will reduce City Council and City Manager accountability to voters, while hoping the noise and distraction of an enormous November ballot keeps voters uninformed.  

Public notice on these actions was minimal and Mayor Watson made sure that public discussion and public comment on the proposals was minimized.  While some of the proposed amendments -- including ones to make it harder to petition ordinances like the SOS ordinance onto the ballot (Prop. G) and to make it almost impossible to petition a recall election (Prop H)-- were subject to a Charter Review Commission process, many were added at the last minute by city staff and supported by the city council.  For the ones subject to the Commission review, the City Council told the Commission upfront to gut voter initiative and recall powers at the outset.  (Only Councilmembers Makenzie Kelly and Alison Alter opposed placing some of the more offensive amendments on the ballot.) 
​
We urge either voting "NO" on all of the proposed amendments, or vote "NO" on all but Prop I, which is the only measure that would strengthen City Hall accountability by having the City Attorney appointed by the City Council instead of the City Manager.  This proposal barely lost in a previous charter amendment election.  
Read the ordinance calling the November 5 election HERE and stay tuned for further information. Meanwhile, tell your Austin voting friends to "just vote no thank you, on amending the Austin City Charter." ​

On Tuesday, August 13, the Hays County Commissioners Court voted to place a $440 million  road bond on the November ballot. The bond package includes over $200 million in funding for new and expanded roads over and upstream of the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone. Many of these projects are designed to serve Hill Country developers and will only make traffic worse for current Hays County residents.

If approved by Hays County voters, the road bonds would trigger an average tax increase of $80 per year for Hays County homeowners. Given the current economic climate, with inflation and rising living costs, the decision to increase taxes is a real brain-fart moment for a Commissioners Court that was supposed to be better than their predecessors.

Virtually no one in Hays County was aware of the proposed bond package until early last week. Once the word got out, the environmental community united to ask that any bond proposal be postponed until next year, following a public stakeholder process to select the best projects for Hays County. Taxpayer and transportation advocates also urged the Hays County Commissioners Courts to postpone. The Commissioners ignored these requests from dozens of individuals and organizations.

The bond package, if approved by Hays County voters, includes funding for a “Dripping Springs Bypass,” an extension of RM150 west of its current terminus at RM 12 that will do nothing for traffic congestion. The only purpose of this southwest Dripping Springs loop is to open up vast areas in the upper Onion Creek watershed for new development.

Additionally, there is $7.5 million to support an extension of SH 45 SW through both Hays and Travis counties. Travis County Commissioners and environmental advocates have long opposed this project because, if built, it would convert Mopac from a local commuter highway into an alternative “I35 West,” diverting interstate and interregional traffic onto the Edwards Aquifer and through Zilker Park. If approved, the bond would also fund several other new “greenfield” roads aimed to unlock land over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone west of Kyle and Buda.
Not all the projects included are bad—some will address safety concerns and serve the rapid development along the I-35 corridor. No one objected to these projects, but the Hays County Judge and Commissioners bundled the bad with the good, giving voters no choice but to say “yes” or “no.”
​
SOS urges its Hays County supporters to vote “NO” on the road bonds this November. If defeated, the County Commissioners can do what was asked of them: appoint a citizen bond advisory committee to develop a bond package that meets transportation needs while protecting the beautiful and vulnerable Hill Country waters that feed San Marcos Springs, Barton Springs, Onion Creek, Barton Creek, and the Blanco River.

Thanks to YOUR loud opposition, the City Council has backed down from their proposal to raise pool entry fees at Barton Springs and other city pools. The proposed increase from $5 to $8 for resident adults—and similar hikes for other age groups—would have made our cherished pools less accessible to many in our community. SOS thanks you for speaking to keep our cherished pools a community refuge.

This decision is especially important given the facts: Despite Barton Springs Pool generating over $4 million in revenue annually, none of that money is specifically allocated to PARD. Meanwhile, the city’s golf program operates at a $600,000 surplus. These fee hikes were unnecessary and tone deaf at a time when public pools are essential to public health in the face of rising temps. 

City officials cited the “question and concern” raised by the community as the primary reason for rescinding the fee hike proposal. It’s clear that our collective voices made the difference. The fees will remain at their current levels, keeping our public pools affordable and open to all.
​
This victory is a powerful reminder that when we stand together, we can make a difference. Let’s keep this momentum going. Take a moment to thank the City Council members who listened to our concerns and supported our vision for affordable public spaces.