Corpus Christi Council adopts updated drought contingency plan with new triggers, consumer protections

The Corpus Christi City Council voted March 18 to adopt an updated drought contingency plan and an ordinance amending city code (Chapter 55, Article 12) governing water resource management.

The vote came after two public listening sessions, revisions from staff and council, and extensive public comment urging stronger curtailment of large industrial water users. Mayor Paulette Guajardo and council members approved the plan after an amendment adopting recent, highlighted textual changes was added and passed by the council.

The council adopted the plan to satisfy Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) requirements and to keep the city eligible for expedited state permitting for new supply projects such as groundwater wells and pipeline hookups. Corpus Christi Water staff and the city said the TCEQ requires an updated plan on file before it will process certain permits and encouraged the council to approve the plan to avoid delays.

Why it matters: The DCP establishes when the city will declare stages 1–4 drought conditions, how demand-reduction measures and optional surcharges would be applied, and what triggers would move the city into an emergency (stage 4). Staff emphasized the plan’s role in protecting the city’s ability to secure new supplies — notably wells and the Mary Rhodes pipeline — and in clarifying reporting and response steps for residents and businesses.

Key provisions and changes - Triggers: The plan aligns a water emergency (stage 4) trigger with a modeling benchmark used by TCEQ — a 180-day horizon in which supplies are modeled to fall short of demand. Staff explained the 180‑day standard mirrors TCEQ practice and reflects combined system modeling that includes Lake Corpus Christi, Choke Canyon, Lake Texana, the Colorado River and any secured Nueces River supplies. - Industry and surcharges: Staff said large-volume users have contributed to a drought surcharge fund; the plan preserves an optional surcharge framework and raises the residential surcharge threshold from 3,000 to 7,000 gallons per month for any optional surcharges. Optional surcharge ranges discussed during drafting were: stage 2 — $1–$3/1,000 gallons, stage 3 — $2–$6/1,000; water emergency — $4–$12/1,000. - Curtailment and moratoriums: The moratorium on new water services was shifted in the draft from stage 3 to water emergency; targeted demand reductions were reduced from earlier, more aggressive targets after public comment. - Residential allowances and landscaping: The draft clarifies allowances for drip irrigation for foundations/landscape beds during stage 3 (every other week) and permits hand‑watering of vegetable beds and watering of trees. Pools and car wash rules were modified to reduce the burden on working families and small businesses after outreach to pool, landscaping and car‑wash trade groups. - New supply and reuse: Staff described ongoing supply actions tied to the plan: additional wells (test well yields were described at about 1–2 million gallons per day per well), first‑come/first‑serve Type 1 wastewater effluent distribution (reported nearly fully subscribed), and startup of additional pipeline capacity from the Mary Rhodes pipeline (staff said approximately 20 million gallons per day would come on line March 24 under current plans). Staff told council that one recently tested well yielded about 2,000,000 gallons per day in an early test and that the city is conservatively estimating future wells at roughly 1 to 1.5 MGD each until more data are in.

Public debate and council concerns Public comment focused heavily on the plan’s treatment of heavy industrial users. Dozens of residents and community organizations urged the council to add mandatory curtailment for the largest water users, to publish more transparent, timely usage and model data, and to end the drought surcharge exemption for certain high‑volume users. Speakers named local industrial users (participants in public comment included references to Valero, Flint Hills, LyondellBasell, Citgo and San Patricio MWD) and said city policy had favored industry over residents.

Council questions emphasized three areas: (1) clarity of the emergency trigger and how the public will be informed about how many days of supply remain; (2) how the DCP interacts with permitting and securing new supplies (wells, pipeline, purchases such as water from Corpus Christi Polymers); and (3) whether the city should require more frequent, public modeling updates. Staff agreed to provide modeling results to council and publish system modeling and consumption data on the city website on a bi‑weekly basis once modeling is fully cross‑checked.

Council action and next steps Councilmember Carolyn Vaughn moved to adopt the drought contingency plan as presented; the council subsequently adopted an amendment to incorporate recent, highlighted changes from staff (the council approved the amendment and then the ordinance). The motion to adopt the plan as amended carried unanimously.

Staff said the plan takes effect immediately upon passage and will be submitted to TCEQ. The plan includes directions for staff to continue publishing consumption and model data, to establish a citizen stakeholder panel for ongoing input, and to return to council with water conservation plan updates and utility performance metrics.

What the plan does not do The adopted plan does not add a mandatory curtailment schedule for exempted heavy users that some residents requested; council members who supported adoption said the city lacks the regulatory authority to impose some of the measures residents demanded without reworking existing ordinances and pending discussions with industry and state regulators.

Looking ahead Council members and staff said they expect to brief the council and the public on new well yields and pipeline operations, and to post bi‑weekly modeling updates once the modeling is finalized. Staff also advised council that without an approved plan on file, TCEQ could slow or decline certain permits needed for wells and other supply projects, creating operational obstacles for the city’s short‑term supply strategy.

Ending: The council adopted the DCP to meet state requirements and to preserve the city’s ability to move forward with wells, pipeline hookups and other emergency supply measures. Residents who testified said the plan fell short on mandatory industry curtailment; supporters said the changes give staff the tools to act quickly and keep supply projects on schedule.