YDHLGE Logo
YDHLGEYou Don't Hate Local Government Enough
Back to Docket Search
4 • REGULARGuadalupe County Groundwater Conservation District (Guadalupe County)

Discussion and possible action on alleged violations by Ranchy McRanchface,

Presented in: Board of Directors Regular Meeting - September 24, 2026 on 2026-09-24
Meeting Agenda PDF

Official Roll-Call Vote

Routine / Procedural • 0.0 Score Impact
PASSED (6 - 1)
“Action on Item 4: Discussion and possible action on alleged violations by Ranchy McRanchface,”
JS
Jeff Schuehle
Director (District 1)
YES
AR
A Robert Raetzsch
Director (District 2)
YES
RC
Rebecca Clark
Director (District 3)
YES
JN
Jamie Nielson
Director (District 4)
NO
CA
Chris Ayotte
Director (District 5)
YES
HS
Hilmar Starcke
Director (District 6)
YES
MM
Matt Miranda
Director (District 7)
YES

Staff Report & Agenda Item Details

Discussion and possible action on alleged violations by Ranchy McRanchface, LLC, including but not limited to appropriate penalties and/or other enforcement remedies to be imposed and/or pursued in court. - Violation 1: Ranch house well. Motion by Director Schuehle; seconded by Director Miranda: Ranchy McRanchface, LLC violated District Rules 5.3(a)(1) and 5.3(a)(2) by producing groundwater from the Ranch House Well for a non-exempt use without a Production Permit from the District. Having considered each of the factors in District Rule 9.5(b), the Board would assess a penalty of $7,500 for this violation, payable to the District within 15 days. If the penalty is not paid on time, a lawsuit would be filed under the District’s enforcement authority to enforce the judgment and to pursue all costs and fees under Section 36.102 of the Water Code. Final vote 6-1; Director Nielson opposed. Violation 2: Pole barn well Initial motion by Director Schuehle; seconded by Director Miranda: Ranchy McRanchface, LLC violated District Rules 5.3(a)(1) and 5.3(a)(2) by producing groundwater from the Pole Barn Well for a non-exempt use, serving the Pole Barn clubhouse, while the well was registered as an exempt livestock well and without a Production Permit from the District, and Ranchy knew the District rules required a permit. Having considered each of the factors in District Rule 9.5(b), including that this was a repeat violation, the Board would assess a penalty of $37,500

Bastiat Liberty & Property Rights Analysis

This docket item is classified as NEUTRAL (0.0 Score Impact). Routine administrative reports, monthly accounts payable/disbursement registers, minutes approvals, and procedural motions are logged for public transparency but carry zero weight in calculating an official's Roll-Call Freedom Score.