The twin specters of "running dry" and the "surface water/runaway development " scenario is for Wimberley, a monumental – 'rock and a hard place'
Send your comments and news tips to online.editor@valleyspringcomm.net
By Bob Ochoa
RoundUp Editor
Officials from the city of Wimberley, the Guadalupe Blanco River Authority, and the offices of State Rep. Patrick Rose and State Sen. Jeff Wentworth have been huddling recently to explore options for bringing a surface water supply into the Wimberley Valley.
A meeting of stakeholders was held last week, Thursday, Feb. 19. Another meeting has been set for Friday, March 6, in Austin.
Thus far, a small circle of folks has taken part in these latest talks, including Rose, Wentworth's staff, GBRA General Manager Bill West, Wimberley Mayor Tom Haley and city administrator Don Ferguson. The March 6 meeting is expected to include Hays County Judge Liz Sumter, and possibly others.
"We are exploring a lot of different options," Mireya Zapata, a top aide to Rep. Rose, told the RoundUp. "Next week things could start jelling."
"I think it's too early to say if I'm optimistic," city administrator Ferguson said in a phone interview earlier this week. "It's a critical issue facing our community, and I'm talking about the valley, not just Wimberley. We're in month 17 of a drought that nobody knows (when it) will end." He added, "It's an issue that this community has to come to terms with pretty quickly . . . even in the rainiest of times, you can't wait."
As everyone knows, bringing a supply of surface water to the Wimberley valley is a highly sensitive and complex matter that touches on the sensibilities of many people – and it is fraught with huge consequences.
Some argue surface water will open the floodgates to development that will rapidly replace the quiet country atmosphere and scenic vistas with track housing and big boxes. Good bye serenity. Hello sprawl and gridlock. One has only to look down the road to Kyle to see what occurred when ample water supplies were secured.
Then there is the obvious predicament in which the Wimberley valley finds itself – growing little by little, totally dependent on groundwater, in the midst of a hundred year drought, and no telling when the groundwater supply will reach bottom.
The twin specters of "running dry" and the "surface water/runaway development" scenario is, for Wimberley, a monumental – 'rock and a hard place.'
Hopefully, the folks sitting at the table negotiating Wimberley's water future will engage in some common sense give and take. For instance, if (and it's a big if right now) a deal is reached to bring in surface water, Rose and Wentworth, in turn, should be leading the fight to bring more development controls and authority to the county.
Rose was to introduce a bill this week allowing Hays County a local option (voters decide) for increased development authority. Rose aide Zapata says the bill itemizes all the powers that would be granted. That's a great start, but a good negotiator might want to delay concluding any water deals until the Rose bill is signed and sealed and passes the muster of local voters, or some variation of that.
Chapter 36 not likely to get much traction
An issue that is not likely to make it to the negotiating table is "full" Chapter 36 authority for the Hays Trinity Groundwater Conservation District – despite the groundswell of local support it is attracting of late. Zapata recalls a bill Rose sponsored in the last legislative session proposing only small changes to the local groundwater district that went down in flames. "It's not about whether we want or not want (to allow local option taxation)," Zapata said. "The bill two years ago didn't have taxing authority and still got tons of opposition. It's about what the constituents don't want. Many said, 'We don't want our district empowered.'"
Now for the 64,000-dollar question. What are the surface water options under discussion?
First, all the players interviewed agreed that a supply from the LCRA is not an option. That door has closed pretty conclusively. In this time of water scarcity, lawmakers don't seem to be in the mood for granting transfers of surface water supplies from one river basin to another. Second, direct permitting from the GBRA for surface water via Canyon Lake was an option Wimberley had several years back (and didn't take it), and has since closed. "All that water has been committed," says GBRA's general manager West.
A recent photo of a Canyon Lake shoreline showing the effects of the drought.– Photo courtesy WOAI San Antonio
Nevertheless, the focus is back on the GBRA. What might still be available is surface water from the GBRA that is permitted to neighboring cities with surplus supplies, like Kyle and San Marcos.
As West explains it: "We're looking at those customers that have signed a contract and have commitments from us of stored water out of Canyon Lake with supplies that will take them out for several years, where Wimberley would use some of that for say ten years until the original water contract holder demand materializes and needs that water in which time theoretically we would have additional supplies."
Past entreaties for sharing water from Kyle and San Marcos have failed. The current thinking is to give it another shot. Said one source, "We've been working hard on it. San Marcos, Buda and Kyle are going to want to be real neighbors."
Should a sharing arrangement be reached, and it meets the financial and legal tests, West says there are other hurdles ahead. "There's still a component of folks who aren't interested in any new water because of the growth question. That's a sensitive issue we're going to have to deal with."
Another challenge is the need for a partnership of Wimberley valley water suppliers and consumers all working toward the same goal of water security – the biggest entities being the city of Wimberley, Wimberley Water Supply Corp., Aqua Texas and the city of Woodcreek.
West assures, "We can get the water (pipeline) to the city limits," if all the pieces fall nicely into place. But it will not come cheap. West estimates the capital cost would be equal to about $4 per thousand gallons – double the current price paid by most water system users around Wimberley. That does not include the added cost of transportation and distribution.
This story has long legs. If you hear anything new, make sure to share.
Some observations and questions going forward:
It would do well to reexamine the groundwater emergency declared several years ago in northern Hays County under Jim Powers' commissioners court. The emergency was declared on the basis of a few wells going dry in Sunset Canyon. The declaration triggered the LCRA surface water solution, ostensibly to serve then current residents. Of course, the clear result has been an explosion in new residents, subdivisions and commercial projects around Dripping Springs.
Some questions: a) Will the general public get an opportunity to participate in the talks? b) Will Rose and Wentworth include a requirement for rainwater capture in their legislation for the county, or at least greatly increase incentives for builders and homeowners? c) How much of this push for surface water now is being driven by developer interests?
Finally, a hat tip to those fearless stakeholders and officials who are willing to talk to the media on the record, or even on background. Your trust in the public wisdom and the right to be informed is indispensable.
