Latest news with #FloodInfrastructureFund
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Water bills face deadline threat as Texas lawmakers negotiate spending priorities
Texas is running out of water. And Texas lawmakers are running out of time to solve the problem. With just days left until the legislative session ends, two key pieces of legislation await key votes in the state House and Senate. The two pieces of legislation, Senate Bill 7 and House Joint Resolution 7, are supposed to work together to spend billions of dollars to save the state's water supply. Despite Gov. Greg Abbott declaring water an emergency item at the start of the legislative session, which means the bills can be fast-tracked, lawmakers, water agencies, and advocacy groups have reached an impasse on how to spend the money. 'This is a priority for leadership. It is going to have to be negotiated,' said Perry Fowler, executive director of the Texas Water Infrastructure Network. 'This is big, important policy. It is not easy stuff. You end up getting some bumps and bruises.' A Texas 2036 report estimated that the state needs nearly $154 billion by 2050 for water infrastructure, including $59 billion for water supply projects, $74 billion for leaky pipes and infrastructure maintenance, and $21 billion to fix broken wastewater systems. If the bills are approved — and voters agree in the fall —the state will spend about $10 billion over the next decade. The Senate bill would create the administrative framework for how water projects would be funded under the Texas Water Development Board. It also establishes two new oversight bodies: the Texas Water Fund Advisory Committee and the Office of Water Supply Conveyance Coordination. Recent changes to the bill have expanded its scope to include programs like the Flood Infrastructure Fund, the Economically Distressed Areas Program, and the Agricultural Water Conservation Fund. The Senate bill, sponsored by state Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, passed the upper chamber and is now in the House. A floor debate by the full chamber could happen as soon as May 23. The final deadline for the House to give preliminary approval to Senate bills is May 27. The House resolution, sponsored by state Rep. Cody Harris, R-Palestine, is where the real tension lies. The resolution proposes a constitutional amendment that would dedicate up to $1 billion per year to the Texas Water Fund for the next decade — money that would allow local governments and water providers to build supply and fix aging systems. The resolution passed the House and was referred to a Senate committee. Perry proposed changes to the resolution that spell out how the money is to be spent. Water policy experts, lobbyists, and environmental groups have raised concerns about the rigid funding formula. Sarah Kirkle, policy director at the Texas Water Conservation Association, said the allocation formula remains the main hurdle between the two chambers. 'The biggest conversations between the House and Senate will be focused on how much of the dedicated funding goes to new supply projects versus a wider range of project types, that includes other water supply projects, wastewater projects, potentially flood projects, and all of our infrastructure repair and replacement projects,' she said. Originally, the House proposal gave the water board broad discretion over how to spend the money. The options can broadly be divided into two categories. New water supply: desalinating brackish groundwater and marine water to make it drinkable, 'shovel-ready' reservoirs and constructing pipelines to transport water across the state. The other, leaky pipes: repairing the state's old and deteriorating water infrastructure. The Senate amendment now mandates that 80% of the money goes to new water supply projects, such as desalination, while only 20% would be reserved for repairs, conservation, and flood mitigation. This split has become the flashpoint of the legislative debate. At the hearing, Perry strongly advocated for what he calls a 'long-term water supply' plan that prioritizes new water supply projects over infrastructure repairs. He defended the split, saying that fixing every leak in that state would not be enough water recovered to solve the state's future supply challenges. Perry said that if the split doesn't favor water supply, big cities will take all the funding and 'the state would have missed an opportunity with the limited funds available to actually address a supply need that is critical to continue the Texas Miracle for decades to come.' He argued that with this plan he is protecting all interests in the state's 254 counties and guaranteeing rural areas will benefit and not get left behind. 'That's why I'm heavily weighted on supply,' he said. Many argue that the prescriptive split undermines local flexibility and shifts too much attention toward new water supply projects, desalination and pipelines, at the expense of urgently needed repairs to infrastructure or flooding mitigation. Fowler said the state's top three leaders – Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and House Speaker Dustin Burrows — are aligned with having no split and letting the water board determine what is best. He added that there will need to be a 'reasonable compromise with Sen. Perry to keep [legislation] moving forward.' Andrew Mahaleris, Abbott's spokesman, didn't say if the governor had a preference on how the money is spent. However, Mahaleris said the governor wants to make 'the largest investment in water in Texas history' so the state can do both. The state 'must also invest in new water supply strategies that develop resources like desalination facilities and transportation infrastructure and ensure rural Texas communities have the resources to maintain existing water systems,' Mahaleris said. He assured that the governor will continue to work with Perry and Harris on the legislation. Burrows also did not comment on the split. 'By providing the resources and funding for critical water supply infrastructure projects, the state is taking a proactive approach to keeping up with population growth and ensuring Texas communities are able to have their water needs met,' he said in a statement. 'I look forward to a thoughtful debate when Senate Bill 7 comes to the House floor later this week,' he said. Patrick's office did not return a request for comment. Jennifer Walker, director for the Texas Coast and Water program with the National Wildlife Federation, said she thinks the split will change. 'I don't think it's gonna be 80/20… I would prefer no split,' Walker said. 'I don't think that's realistic. But we have to reject this false narrative that only projects labeled as 'new supply' can secure our water future.' Walker and other water experts said negotiations over the split are ongoing. 'It's gotten real quiet,' she said. 'It does make me nervous. Time is running out.' Despite the debate, most of the organizations supporting the bills believe the proposals will ultimately pass. 'Water has been a key priority for much of state leadership this session. I have a lot of faith that they're going to be able to advance both pieces of legislation,' Kirkle said. The Senate committee must advance the House bill before May 24. 'I can't imagine anyone being okay with this falling apart,' Fowler said. 'It needs to get resolved.' If both chambers pass their respective versions, the bills will move to a conference committee, where the most contentious decisions will be made out of public view, behind the scenes. There lawmakers will need to reconcile their differences. If they do, the decision will ultimately fall to Texas voters, who will decide in November whether to approve the new constitutional amendment. Disclosure: Texas 2036 and Conservation Fund have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Associated Press
28-04-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Can Texas lawmakers agree on how to spend billions to save the state's water supply?
LUBBOCK, Texas (AP) — As water legislation advances in the Texas Legislature, a sharp divide has surfaced over how the state should safeguard and grow its water supply. The Texas House last week took its first step toward tinkering with legislation already approved unanimously by the Senate. Their changes set up protracted negotiations between the two chambers and dozens of water advocacy groups that all have opinions on how billions of dollars should be spent over the next decade. At a Thursday House committee hearing, the state's water community showed overwhelming support for changes to a Senate bill proposed by state Rep. Cody Harris, R-Palenstine. His proposals provide more flexibility over what kind of water projects can be funded in the future. That committee hearing offered a first look into how negotiations between the state House and Senate may go in the final month of the legislative session. Lawmakers in both chambers have put forth legislative packages to address the state's looming water crisis. So far, much of the attention this legislative session has been focused on the Senate, where state Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, has pushed his solution to the state water crisis that calls for a major investment to create new water supply through a Senate resolution. For months, water advocacy groups and water utility managers have suggested Perry's proposal is too prescriptive and puts too much focus on creating new water supply. His resolution calls for 80% of new revenue to be put toward projects such as desalination, which cleans sea and brackish water well enough to drink. The remaining 20% would be distributed for water infrastructure repairs, conservation programs and flood mitigation. These are tasks that experts say Texas is already billions of dollars and years behind on improving. The resolution has not been debated by either chamber yet. On Thursday, Harris presented changes to Perry's priority legislation that would remove such a formula and place decision-making authority with the Texas Water Development Board. It also expands funding eligibility to include water reuse, reservoir projects permitted by the state, and conveyance projects to transport water. It also allows money to be used for the Flood Infrastructure Fund, the Economically Distressed Areas Program, and the Agricultural Water Conservation Fund. 'Through this bill, we prioritize small, rural and failing utilities by explicitly stating the fund can be used to provide grants to those systems and providing additional resources for technical assistance,' Harris said. Sarah Kirkle with the Texas Water Association spoke in favor of the changes to Perry's bill, and thanked Harris for his willingness to work with the water community. 'Overall, this bill provides additional tools in the toolbox to support the diverse needs of Texas communities,' Kirkle said. 'But, it depends on additional funds to make it successful.' Jed Murray, director of government relations for the Texas International Produce Association, told the committee that the bill doesn't do enough to address the needs in South Texas and the Rio Grande Valley. The area has experienced severe water scarcity in recent years, which has upended agricultural production in the region. Murray said water in the Valley comes from the Rio Grande River, and they need to upgrade infrastructure to conserve it. New water supply projects won't help them, he said. 'New water is a great idea, but we won't get new water quick enough to save our growers,' Murray said. 'To do that, we have to figure out how we can conserve and redo our infrastructure.' However the legislation shakes out, voters likely will be asked to approve spending $1 billion a year for the next decade. But another possible wrench in the progress is a tug-of-war over constitutional amendments. For weeks, Texas House Democrats have stalled progress on constitutional amendments, leveraging one of their few powers in an attempt to extract concessions from Republicans on other issues this session. The House proposal to ask voters for the money could be debated as early as Tuesday, a test to see if Democrats hold the line. Perry Fowler, executive director of the Texas Water Infrastructure Network, said the Legislature must come together to tackle the water crisis. 'If there's one thing that brings everyone together, no matter the party, it's water,' Fowler said. 'I don't think anyone wants to go back to their district and say they stood in the way of doing something truly generational.' It's unclear whether Perry will accept the changes to his signature proposal, which he spent more than a year drafting. Neither Perry or Harris responded to interview requests from the Tribune. Perry has talked about creating new water supplies for a long time in the Capitol, and his proposals this year are consistent with his goals. Perry has repeatedly said this session that creating new sources of water must be the top priority. If they don't create these new sources now, Perry has said, the opportunity won't be there in the future. At the same time, water experts say both creating new water and protecting the existing supply are important. They also say the decision on how the money is split shouldn't be up to lawmakers. 'Both are very important,' said Robert R. Puente, CEO for San Antonio Water System. However, he added, 'Whether you concentrate on one or the other, I think depends on your water utility.' Puente points to two cities with different needs — San Antonio and Corpus Christi. Corpus Christi 'needs water tomorrow,' Puente told the Tribune. The city is betting on seawater desalination, which will separate salt from seawater so it can be used for drinking water. It has four pending permits for the projects with the state's environmental agency. Unlike Corpus Christi, San Antonio is focused on what Puente calls 'lost water' or repairing and replacing infrastructure so that water is not lost through leaks and breaks. He said their focus lies there because San Antonio has been able to diversify its water sources to include water conservation, water recycling, desalination and storing excess water underground during wet periods, allowing it to be withdrawn during droughts. The utility has been able to reduce its water consumption by 49% in the last 40 years. While San Antonio has led in water strategies, the city lost 19.5 billion gallons of water in 2023 because of aging water infrastructure and extreme heat. Lee Blaney, an environmental engineering professor with the University of Maryland Baltimore County, said losing water to leaking water pipes is a national problem — around 6 billion gallons of treated water is lost every day in the U.S. Part of the solution has to be fixing the infrastructure, Blaney said. 'We can create new drinking water supplies but, if we're still losing so much water due to outdated infrastructure, shouldn't we focus on improving the distribution system?' Blaney said. Even as water organizations have explained the shape Texas' water system is in, there hasn't been the appetite to do a full overhaul of Texas' water infrastructure. Blaney said it would be difficult and costly to update the distribution system. Everything would need to be dug up in order to reach the pipes underground, he said. 'I think the long-term disruption that comes with such updates is one of the primary reasons why we haven't invested in that direction just yet,' Blaney said. 'But we can't keep patching the system over and over. It's going to lead to bigger issues that are more difficult to address in the future.' Puente said SAWS has doubled its leak detection team since 2023, hired new crews to respond faster, and launched a $215 million project in 2022 to install automated water meters across San Antonio. Puente said this strategy helps the utility be proactive, instead of reactionary, but the utility and others need funding to continue this work. Amy Hardberger, director for the Center for Water Law and Policy at Texas Tech University, said the price of some methods to create new water or treat it can be expensive. The water supply now is already in the system, she said, and its loss through aging infrastructure can be prevented by maintenance and repair. 'That's not water we have to go buy and move somewhere or treat,' Hardberger said. 'Infrastructure replacement is not inexpensive, but it is less expensive than some of the new supply options.' A Texas 2036 report estimated that the state needs nearly $154 billion by 2050 for water infrastructure, including $59 billion for water supply projects, $74 billion for leaky pipes and infrastructure maintenance, and $21 billion to fix broken wastewater systems. ___ This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Yahoo
28-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Can Texas lawmakers agree on how to spend billions to save the state's water supply?
LUBBOCK — As water legislation advances in the Texas Legislature, a sharp divide has surfaced over how the state should safeguard and grow its water supply. The Texas House last week took its first step toward tinkering with legislation already approved unanimously by the Senate. Their changes set up protracted negotiations between the two chambers and dozens of water advocacy groups that all have opinions on how billions of dollars should be spent over the next decade. At a Thursday House committee hearing, the state's water community showed overwhelming support for changes to a Senate bill proposed by state Rep. Cody Harris, R-Palenstine. His proposals provide more flexibility for state and local officials to spend billions of dollars over the next decade on projects they deem necessary. That committee hearing offered a first look into how negotiations between the state House and Senate may go in the final month of the legislative session. Lawmakers in both chambers have put forth legislative packages to address the state's looming water crisis. So far, much of the attention this legislative session has been focused on the Senate, where state Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, has pushed his solution to the state water crisis that calls for a major investment to create new water supply. For months, water advocacy groups and water utility managers have suggested Perry's proposal is too prescriptive and puts too much focus on creating new water supply. His plan calls for 80% of new revenue to be put toward projects such as desalination, which cleans sea and brackish water well enough to drink. The remaining 20% would be distributed for water infrastructure repairs, conservation programs and flood mitigation. These are tasks that experts say Texas is already billions of dollars and years behind on improving. On Thursday, Harris presented changes to Perry's priority legislation that would remove such a formula and place decision-making authority with the Texas Water Development Board. It also expands funding eligibility to include water reuse, reservoir projects permitted by the state, and conveyance projects to transport water. It also allows money to be used for the Flood Infrastructure Fund, the Economically Distressed Areas Program, and the Agricultural Water Conservation Fund. [East Texans united to stop a water sale to Dallas suburbs — for now] 'Through this bill, we prioritize small, rural and failing utilities by explicitly stating the fund can be used to provide grants to those systems and providing additional resources for technical assistance,' Harris said. Sarah Kirkle with the Texas Water Association spoke in favor of the changes to Perry's bill, and thanked Harris for his willingness to work with the water community. 'Overall, this bill provides additional tools in the toolbox to support the diverse needs of Texas communities,' Kirkle said. 'But, it depends on additional funds to make it successful.' Jed Murray, director of government relations for the Texas International Produce Association, told the committee that the bill doesn't do enough to address the needs in South Texas and the Rio Grande Valley. The area has experienced severe water scarcity in recent years, which has upended agricultural production in the region. Murray said water in the Valley comes from the Rio Grande River, and they need to upgrade infrastructure to conserve it. New water supply projects won't help them, he said. [Want to understand Texas' water crisis? Start with the guide to water terms.] 'New water is a great idea, but we won't get new water quick enough to save our growers,' Murray said. 'To do that, we have to figure out how we can conserve and redo our infrastructure.' However the legislation shakes out, voters likely will be asked to approve spending $1 billion a year for the next decade. But another possible wrench in the progress is a tug-of-war over constitutional amendments. For weeks, Texas House Democrats have stalled progress on constitutional amendments, leveraging one of their few powers in an attempt to extract concessions from Republicans on other issues this session. The House proposal to ask voters for the money could be debated as early as Tuesday, a test to see if Democrats hold the line. Perry Fowler, executive director of the Texas Water Infrastructure Network, said the Legislature must come together to tackle the water crisis. 'If there's one thing that brings everyone together, no matter the party, it's water,' Fowler said. 'I don't think anyone wants to go back to their district and say they stood in the way of doing something truly generational.' It's unclear whether Perry will accept the changes to his signature proposal, which he spent more than a year drafting. Neither Perry or Harris responded to interview requests from the Tribune. Perry has talked about creating new water supplies for a long time in the Capitol, and his proposals this year are consistent with his goals. Perry has repeatedly said this session that creating new sources of water must be the top priority. If they don't create these new sources now, Perry has said, the opportunity won't be there in the future. At the same time, water experts say both creating new water and protecting the existing supply are important. They also say the decision on how the money is split shouldn't be up to lawmakers. 'Both are very important,' said Robert R. Puente, CEO for San Antonio Water System. However, he added, 'Whether you concentrate on one or the other, I think depends on your water utility.' Puente points to two cities with different needs — San Antonio and Corpus Christi. Corpus Christi 'needs water tomorrow,' Puente told the Tribune. The city is betting on seawater desalination, which will separate salt from seawater so it can be used for drinking water. It has four pending permits for the projects with the state's environmental agency. Unlike Corpus Christi, San Antonio is focused on what Puente calls 'lost water' or repairing and replacing infrastructure so that water is not lost through leaks and breaks. He said their focus lies there because San Antonio has been able to diversify its water sources to include water conservation, water recycling, desalination and storing excess water underground during wet periods, allowing it to be withdrawn during droughts. The utility has been able to reduce its water consumption by 49% in the last 40 years. While San Antonio has led in water strategies, the city lost 19.5 billion gallons of water in 2023 because of aging water infrastructure and extreme heat. Lee Blaney, an environmental engineering professor with the University of Maryland Baltimore County, said losing water to leaking water pipes is a national problem — around 6 billion gallons of treated water is lost every day in the U.S. Part of the solution has to be fixing the infrastructure, Blaney said. 'We can create new drinking water supplies but, if we're still losing so much water due to outdated infrastructure, shouldn't we focus on improving the distribution system?' Blaney said. Even as water organizations have explained the shape Texas' water system is in, there hasn't been the appetite to do a full overhaul of Texas' water infrastructure. Blaney said it would be difficult and costly to update the distribution system. Everything would need to be dug up in order to reach the pipes underground, he said. 'I think the long-term disruption that comes with such updates is one of the primary reasons why we haven't invested in that direction just yet,' Blaney said. 'But we can't keep patching the system over and over. It's going to lead to bigger issues that are more difficult to address in the future.' Puente said SAWS has doubled its leak detection team since 2023, hired new crews to respond faster, and launched a $215 million project in 2022 to install automated water meters across San Antonio. Puente said this strategy helps the utility be proactive, instead of reactionary, but the utility and others need funding to continue this work. Amy Hardberger, director for the Center for Water Law and Policy at Texas Tech University, said the price of some methods to create new water or treat it can be expensive. The water supply now is already in the system, she said, and its loss through aging infrastructure can be prevented by maintenance and repair. 'That's not water we have to go buy and move somewhere or treat,' Hardberger said. 'Infrastructure replacement is not inexpensive, but it is less expensive than some of the new supply options.' A Texas 2036 report estimated that the state needs nearly $154 billion by 2050 for water infrastructure, including $59 billion for water supply projects, $74 billion for leaky pipes and infrastructure maintenance, and $21 billion to fix broken wastewater systems. Disclosure: San Antonio Water System, Texas 2036, Texas Tech University and Conservation Fund have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. Tickets are on sale now for the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Get tickets before May 1 and save big! TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
