Published: May 25, 2007 05:42 pm            

Hopson says Dallas must cut water use

By Jim Goodson

editor@jacksonvilleprogress.com



AUSTIN – State Rep. Chuck Hopson said Thursday he and other East Texas legislators who successfully kept two reservoirs out of the state’s water planning bill realize Dallas has special problems. But until the state’s second-largest city reduces its water usage, it won’t find much support among legislators.

“The average Dallas resident uses 234 gallons of water per day,” Hopson said. “San Antonio customers use 134 gallons of water per day. The state average is below 200 gallons.

“Dallas has a shallow top-soil and too many people have planted St. Augustine grass in their yard, which is not native to that area. It requires too much water.”

Hopson, Atlanta Rep. Steven Frost and Tyler Rep. Leo Berman held a coalition of House members together to have Marvin Nichols and Lake Fastrill reservoirs removed from Senate Bill 3, the first water bill passed by the Legislature in 10 years.

The bill protects streams, rivers and estuaries, conserves water and designates more than a dozen future reservoir sites across Texas.

But the measure, which Dallas officials hoped would protect years of water planning efforts, now does nothing but hinder them, North Texas lawmakers say. Reservoirs that the area has counted on have been stripped from the bill, and the measure limits the region’s ability to acquire future water sources.

As lawmakers debated the bill for several hours, many amendments were tacked on with a clear anti-Dallas sentiment, as House members from East Texas and elsewhere complained that Dallas wasn't doing its part by conserving enough. North Texas representatives say that the area is booming and needs to plan for rapid population growth.

But the bill in its current form “does not solve any of Dallas’ short or long term needs,” said Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas. “It’s a disappointment when a major bill like this is written on the floor. What came out of the House hurts Dallas more than helps.”

One amendment approved Tuesday would require the state's water districts to bring down their average per capita water consumption to below 200 gallons a day before they can add new reservoirs to their water plans. Dallas is currently the only big city in Texas that surpasses this threshold, lawmakers said; its water customers use an average 264 gallons per capita per day.

“It’s really difficult for people in my area of the state to understand why we need to flood our property in order for another region to continue to be wasteful,” Frost, D-Atlanta, said.

Another amendment puts cities and counties at risk of losing designation for their future reservoirs unless they show a formal, financial commitment to the project by August 2013. Landowners in the footprint of possible future reservoirs – namely Dallas’ proposed Marvin Nichols and Fastrill reservoirs – have complained the designation ties their hands to sell or improve their property, and that they still have no assurance the reservoir will come through.

North Texas lawmakers didn’t try to tack the reservoirs back on to the House bill on Tuesday – fearing opposition might kill the bill.

all together. And while they were originally confident they would be able to put the reservoirs back on in conference committee, they now say they’re not so sure.

Rep. Robert Puente, the San Antonio Democrat who chairs the House Natural Resources Committee and shepherded the bill through a full day of debate, said that if the Dallas reservoirs aren’t added back on in conference committee, they might be attached to other bills.

“The mood on the floor was not to put in the reservoirs,” Mr. Puente said. “One thing Dallas still has to address is its high water usage.”

The comprehensive water bill has been in the works for years, when legislation championed by Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst passed the Senate but died in the House. This session, the Senate cranked out another version – only to watch the House leave it at its doorstep for more than a month.

Dallas officials feared the holdup would undermine the city’s future reservoirs, allowing environmental groups and federal agencies to chip away at years of regional water planning.

Two of the bill's key provisions – governing the flow of water and prompting more conservation – were not controversial. Under the measure, the state would have specific guidelines for conserving water and would set up a system to ensure all the state's lakes, rivers, estuaries and bays have enough water to remain ecologically sound.

North Texas officials have questioned the “environmental flows” provision, fearing that a lack of water in some parts of the state could force Dallas, which currently has an ample supply, to send more downstream.

But Dallas officials originally accepted this provision as a worthwhile sacrifice – with the understanding that the state would be designating the city's future reservoir sites. Now, they fear they made a bad trade.

Designating future reservoirs is controversial because establishing them almost always involves a draining, years-long fight between city officials and longtime landowners. On Tuesday, several amendments tacked onto the water bill gave property owners and rural communities greater assurances including offering them environmental mitigation – set-asides required to make up for habitat destruction – and protecting their rights to conduct mineral exploration on their properties.

Rep. Will Hartnett, R-Dallas, said either “something will work out (for Dallas) in conference, or the bill will die.”

“The bill in the current form is completely unacceptable,” he said.

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.