PERCEIVED RISK AND THE SITING OF A CONTROVERSIAL ...

Gonzalez, 2009). When it became known that a previous permit to increase the
wastewater effluent from the existing Lorena plant, had been filed with TCEQ on
February 9, 2007, many Bull Hide creek residents were furious. Permit
#WQ0014782001 would have expanded Lorena’s current plant and continued to
discharge effluent into Cow Bayou tributary. They felt this proved a history of excluding
stakeholders in policy deliberations and clearly demonstrated there had been another
option to the construction of the Bull Hide plant. However, because it involved an
existing plant in Lorena, land owners on Bull Hide creek were not apprised nor included
in any planning discussions. The suspicion that resulted from the filings was an
unresolved issue for years and contributed to the amplification of perceived risk.
Contributing to the distrust was the lack of “explosion of growth” in Lorena after
the City connected to the wastewater plant in 2012 as had been predicted (Shapiro,
2012). This may be partially explained because this was during one of the slowest
housing construction periods in history and a national economy that was depressed
(Evatt, 2012). Opponents, however, had insisted since March of 2008 that a new plant
was not needed, simply better management and maintenance; man believed Lorena
would not experience growth with a new plant due to higher taxes and utility rates
resulting from costs associated with the new plant.
This conflict is typical of those found in areas of urban expansion. Like so many
rural landowners, the Bull Hide community desired to maintain the status quo of their
rural neighborhood and preserve the natural state of their local waterway. As in cases
involving locally unwanted land uses (LULUS) the residents expressed concern about
38