Corpus Christi council reviews drought contingency plan; staff outlines baselines, surcharges and enforcement

Corpus Christi Water Chief Operating Officer Nick Winkelmann presented the City Council with a workshop review of the city's drought contingency plan, laying out how the plan would trigger mandatory curtailments, how baselines would be set for different customer classes, and how temporary surcharges and enforcement would be applied if the city declares a Level 1 water emergency.

Winkelmann told the council that the plan sets Level 1 as a point when the city is projected to be 180 days away from supply not meeting demand: “Level 1 water emergency is when we are projected to be 180 days away from supply not meeting demand,” he said, adding that curtailment and allocation percentages will be computed by consultants and brought back under the city manager's recommendation. He described the DCP as a business tool to ‘‘minimize non‑essential water use and ensure supply meets demand.’’

The workshop focused on three practical items the council will be asked to act on if a Level 1 water emergency is declared: acknowledging the emergency, adopting customer-class baselines, and approving any surcharge schedules. Staff proposed a residential baseline of 7,000 gallons per month (applying across meter sizes) and described a surcharge structure taken from the current plan: a residential surcharge of $4 per 1,000 gallons above 7,000 gallons a month and a commercial surcharge of $4 per 1,000 over 55,000 gallons; large nonexempt users would face $12 per 1,000 gallons above a very large threshold, and wholesale customers have separate pro rata formulas in the plan.

Why it matters: baselines and surcharges determine who pays more during a drought and who must reduce usage first. Council members repeatedly pressed staff to show the underlying spreadsheet-level data that will be used to calculate individualized targets for large-volume and wholesale customers.

Council reaction and legal questions

Council members asked detailed questions about the drought-surcharge exemption fee that allows some large users to pay into a fund to support water-supply projects and thereby be exempt from surcharges. Councilman Kayla Hernandez said she had understood the exemption applied only through stage 3 of the DCP and not during a Level 1 water emergency; she asked staff to check whether the contracts and individual agreements told the same story. "Was I misinformed that it only applied through stage 3 and not through water emergency?" she asked. Legal staff and consultants said the plan's language and the city's legal review indicate the fee can exempt participants from surcharges during a Level 1 emergency but does not exempt them from curtailment allocations.

City attorney Miles Risley noted that agreements also reference Texas Water Code section 11.039 and related authority that permits a water supplier to impose pro rata reductions or other actions in an emergency. "That provision specifically allows us to sit down with the large water users and directly cut them back, potentially even going so far as just to cut them off," he said when explaining the city's enforcement options.

Baselines and enforcement

Staff said large-volume users (23 connections were noted in the presentation) will have individualized baselines calculated from 2022–2024 usage, with the plan's objective to remove anomalies and set fair allocations. Camille Terrace, assistant director of CCW, gave a system-level figure: resident accounts total roughly 90,000 and residential usage accounts for about 14% of system volume.

On enforcement, Winkelmann reminded the council the DCP makes violations class C misdemeanors with fines up to $500 per day and that a second conviction can authorize discontinuation of service for at least one billing cycle. He emphasized enforcement is primarily intended to achieve compliance rather than immediate punitive action.

Other operational items

Mike Dice, interim assistant city manager, briefed the council on moratorium procedures under recent state law (House Bill 2559). A residential or commercial service connection moratorium would require a multi-step public-notice and hearing process and a three‑quarters council vote; staff estimated the minimum statutory process takes about 101 days and moratoriums are limited by statute to two 90-day periods with further restrictions on reapplication.

Winkelmann also reviewed operational prohibitions inside a curtailment (landscape irrigation and vehicle washing from the CCW system are prohibited, filling or refilling pools is allowed only to maintain structural integrity) and noted variance provisions and auxiliary-water definitions (rain capture, wells, effluent reuse) that the council could use to allow limited exceptions.

Next steps

Staff recommended the council approve ordinance language to add clearer definitions ("essential water use," "auxiliary water supply") and said the city manager would forward a recommendation on surcharges and allocations at the April 14 council meeting; staff also scheduled a follow-up council workshop for April 28 to present updated modeling scenarios and detailed baselines for large-volume and wholesale customers.

The workshop closed with staff committing to provide the individualized large‑user baseline spreadsheets to council and to return with citations of contract language when council requested it. The meeting adjourned with staff noting continued work on reuse and effluent connections to reduce system demand.

Ending note: no formal vote or ordinance was adopted at the workshop; the council directed staff to return with the requested documentation and with recommended ordinance language for the April meetings.