Facing a potential water supply crisis earlier this year, Corpus Christi community organizers petitioned to increase water prices for industrial users during droughts. Garnering nearly 13,000 signatures, they aimed to place the Fair Water Amendment on the November ballot.
However, the City Attorney recommended City Council block the proposal using a legal maneuver introduced by Texas’ Republican-led Legislature in 2023.
On Tuesday, council members will vote on this recommendation before the Aug. 17 deadline to place it on the ballot.
“The city attorney wants to silence our community and let big industry keep their special deal,” said Isabel Araiza, a Corpus Christi professor and leader of the advocacy group For the Greater Good, which spearheaded the petition.
This debate impacts some of the largest energy companies and highlights tensions between Corpus Christi residents and the petrochemical sector, which consumes significant water resources.
Bob Paulison, representing a local industry group including ExxonMobil and Occidental Chemical, declined to comment.
Araiza referred to a 2018 agreement with energy companies, exempting them from extra fees during droughts in exchange for funding a seawater desalination plant. The Fair Water Amendment aims to annul this deal, imposing a $3 fee per 1,000 gallons when reservoir levels drop below 30 percent, affecting companies like ExxonMobil and Occidental Chemical.
The surcharge could exceed $1 million monthly for major users, doubling when reservoirs fall below 20 percent.
Peter Zanoni, Corpus Christi’s city manager, warned of potential lawsuits if the amendment proceeds, prompting the proposal of an ordinance labeling it a “climate charter.”
State lawmakers banned municipal “climate charters” in 2023 with Senate Bill 1860, responding to an El Paso initiative for aggressive climate-friendly policies.
The law broadly defines “climate charters” to include policies impacting environmental issues, aligning with the Fair Water Amendment’s focus on water resources.
The Texas Secretary of State’s office agreed in May, suggesting the city determine the amendment’s status.
Chloe Torres, from Texas Campaign for the Environment, criticized the climate charter argument as obstructive, asserting the amendment reverses industrial water use exemptions.
Drought Surcharge Exemption Fee
Introduced in 2018, the Drought Surcharge Exemption Fee fueled debates over water conservation fairness. Joe McComb, former mayor, supported the fee, considering it essential for the city’s future.
Critics say the fee discouraged water conservation during historic droughts, while McComb argued it aimed to develop future water supplies.
Industry spokesman Paulison described the fee as “insurance” for large users, potentially accruing $300 million over 30 years, though insufficient for the desalination plant’s estimated $68 million annual costs.
If blocked by City Council, intervention may be sought from higher courts, with the Aug. 17 deadline allowing time for action, according to attorney Renea Hicks.
Original Story at insideclimatenews.org