Influential Texas State Senator Weighs-In on SAWS - LCRA Water Squabble

State Senator Glen Hegar, a Katy Republican, was a law school classmate of mine. He is the youngest member of the Texas Senate, and a member of the Senate Natural resources Committee. This summer he weighed-in on the SAWS LCRA Colorado River water lawsuit by publishing the following guest commentary in the Austin American Statesman:

It is extremely disappointing that the San Antonio Water System's Board of Trustees decided to file a frivolous lawsuit in hopes of finding a judge who will force the Lower Colorado River Authority to do what science and engineering have proven cannot be done.

I am equally disturbed that SAWS would take this action while pursuing groundwater alternatives in other areas of my Senate district. SAWS must think that acting like a bully and filing a lawsuit will get a different result. However, science and only science will determine the feasibility of the project.

With the rapid increase in Texas population over the next several decades, water fights will increase as demand intensifies. LCRA and SAWS came together in 2001 to plan to develop water together to benefit both regions. The plan was the first of its kind: SAWS would pay to develop and conserve water in the Colorado River basin; in return, SAWS would get some of the water transferred to San Antonio.

Everyone knew it would be expensive and difficult, yet the Legislature said it could go forward so long as LCRA could prove it would protect and benefit the Colorado basin from which the water was to be taken.

After seven years and $35 million, the study came back with a preliminary answer. The plan will not generate enough water to cover the Colorado River basin's water demand growth, protect the environment and meet other customer needs. For those of us in the Colorado basin, we should be grateful to know this now rather than to spend billions on a project that will not work.

The right thing to happen now would be for LCRA and San Antonio to work on what's next rather than go to the courthouse.

The LCRA has done what it said it would do: study the proposal and be honest about the results. SAWS claims that the LCRA was acting foolishly by turning away millions of San Antonio dollars for water development. "We don't understand how LCRA could contemplate giving it all up," says Robert Puente, the head of SAWS.

I guess LCRA knows that when an offer seems too good to be true, it just might be. LCRA is acting on the basis of engineering and science, and the need to protect and benefit the Colorado River basin for which it is responsible, not on a desire for San Antonio's money.

SAWS warns the people in the Colorado River basin that their lakes would have been higher and their agricultural water more reliable if the project had gone through as envisioned.

But the preliminary studies said the opposite — the promises of the original plan cannot be met and also provide adequate water for local people, local industry and the local environment.

Finally, Puente says: "If I lived in their basin, I'd be concerned about how they would make up the loss of all that water, and how it would be paid for if this project does not proceed."

Well, I agree with that. The Colorado River basin will have to conserve and develop water to meet future needs. That is why LCRA has met with hundreds of residents to create a Water Supply Resource Plan, with a target of meeting the needs in the year 2100.

I am confident that LCRA's plan will be based on solid science and reality, not wishes, threats and bags of money from the San Antonio Water System.