Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Drought Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Corpus Christi debates revised drought contingency plan after hours of public comment
Summary
After a packed public comment period, the City Council and staff debated a rewritten drought contingency plan that would raise industrial surcharges, allow limited residential drip and hand-watering, and change triggers for new-meter moratoria. Council failed to postpone final action; the proposed changes remain under review.
City Council considered a major update to the city's drought contingency plan on Feb. 11, a proposal that would raise industrial drought surcharges, move a moratorium on new meters to a later stage and add limited allowances for residential drip and hand watering.
The revised plan was the subject of more than three hours of public comment and repeated motions on whether to postpone or amend the measure. Speakers ranged from landscape and irrigation contractors reporting layoffs to residents demanding stronger restrictions on large industrial water users.
Why it matters: Corpus Christi faces persistent low reservoir levels. The drought contingency plan (DCP) sets the city's staged restrictions, the surcharge schedule and the authority that determines when the city tightens rules. The city manager and Corpus Christi Water staff said the rewrite is intended to create clearer, enforceable stages and fund long-term water projects; opponents called for stronger, earlier limits on industrial consumption and more time for public review.
Key points of the revised plan include: raising the optional drought surcharge for nonexempt high-volume industrial users to $3 / $6 / $12 per 1,000 gallons across increasing drought stages; moving the moratorium on new water-meter applications from stage 3 to the most severe 'water emergency' stage; and allowing limited hand-watering and drip irrigation for trees and landscape beds under certain stages. Staff said those changes respond to comments from industry, builders and residents.
Public pushback focused on two themes: calls for mandatory industrial curtailment and repeal of the surcharge-exemption that allows some large users to pay a fee rather than take immediate cuts; and requests for more time and additional public listening sessions before council takes final action. Several speakers said the plan's prior drafts had already been delayed and that a two-week postponement would allow more stakeholder meetings.
Council votes and next steps: The council considered motions to postpone and to amend. A motion to postpone for two weeks failed after back-and-forth votes and a later motion to adopt the staff'recommended ordinance (including highlighted edits circulated for the second reading) did not carry. Councilmembers and staff said the ordinance can be revisited and amended at a future meeting; staff also said certain practical changes (for example, allowing hand-watering and limited drip irrigation) could be handled by amendment if council directs.
Staff said the city is continuing to engage industry partners and regional agencies as it pursues both short-term drought response and long-term water-supply projects; they noted that moving ahead with a DCP that provides an enforceable path and funding tools helps the city apply for and use state and federal resources. Council did not complete final action on the revised DCP at the Feb. 11 meeting.
Ending: The DCP remains the most contested item on the Council's agenda: the debate highlighted tensions between residents seeking stronger conservation and stakeholders concerned about economic impacts. Council indicated it would revisit the plan at an upcoming meeting and that staff would continue stakeholder outreach in the interval.
