SAN ANTONIO — The San Antonio City Council heard passionate arguments Wednesday night on both sides of the proposed Vista Ridge water pipeline project, with about half of the speakers for it and half against.

Of the 100-plus people who attended the three-hour public meeting, 33 said the construction of a 142-mile pipeline to bring water from Burleson County is needed to ensure jobs and opportunity for San Antonio's future.

Speaking against it, 27 people called the $3.4 billion project too risky and expensive.

The pipeline would be built and initially owned by Vista Ridge Consortium, which consists of Abengoa, a global company based in Spain, and Blue Water Systems of Austin, which has leased the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer water from landowners. The San Antonio Water System would buy up to 16.3 billion gallons of water a year for 30 years and then own the pipeline.

The council is set to discuss the project at an Oct. 15 work session before voting on it Oct. 30.

Read More

Dick Evans, chairman and CEO of Frost Bank, stood with four other local bankers in a show of support for the project.

“Help us get rid of the stigma (that) we don't have enough water,” Evans said.

Rob Killen, chairman-elect of the North San Antonio Chamber of Commerce, told the council, “we all know we're facing critical water shortages.”

“Based on our understanding of the key points, this is a great deal for SAWS customers and the entire city,” Killen said.

But water lawyer Amy Hardberger said the council should “take the time necessary” to ensure that the 581-page contract with a private consortium is “fiscally responsible.” Hardberger said it would commit ratepayers to buying water that may not be needed for years, “and a bill we will always need to pay.”

“I think this warrants more than just one month of review” after the SAWS board approved the contract on Sept. 29, she said.

Some of the opposition came from Central Texas environmental and community advocates who voiced frustration about importing water from a rural county. Although property owners there will be paid through the deal, others in Burleson and surrounding counties fear a drawdown of the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer.

“What about the landowners who chose not to sell their water?” asked Linda Curtis, executive director of the League of Independent Voters of Texas, which coordinated efforts to encourage Central Texans to drive south to address the council.

The Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance and the Save Our Springs Alliance, an Austin-based environmental group, urged the council to delay a decision and assign a study of the proposal to an outside consultant.

Bill Bunch, executive director of the SOS Alliance, said the city's decision is being based on fear of the water being bought by Austin, Houston or Bryan-College Station.

“Nobody else is interested,” he said. “You have all the time in the world.”

“You need affordable water for jobs, and this is not affordable,” Bunch added.

Mike Beldon, former chairman of the Edwards Aquifer Authority, said the opposition uses the $3.4 billion figure, which includes the purchase of the water, even though the actual cost to build the system is $844 million.

“Their effort is simply to stall and kill,” said Beldon, who called on the council to approve the project.

Earlier Wednesday, Mayor Ivy Taylor endorsed the project but urged San Antonians in a news release to attend the hearing, “to encourage a robust public dialogue about this project and SAWS' goals of diversification, conservation and planning for growth.”

Speaking at a luncheon Wednesday held by the San Antonio Clean Technology Forum, Taylor said she sees the project as a good way to broaden the city's supply options while intensifying its conservation efforts. She called Abengoa a “proven, globally tested corporation.”

“As a member of the SAWS board, I'm convinced that the Vista Ridge Water Supply Project is a good opportunity for diversification, using a new structure for water delivery,” Taylor said.

“Conservation is an important component of diversification, not a replacement for it,” she later added.

During a panel discussion at the luncheon, SAWS Trustee Reed Williams said he didn't know how much rates would have to actually increase to pay for the project, even though a hike of up to 16 percent to 17 percent has been projected. SAWS may be able to minimize the rate hike by selling some water to smaller communities along the pipeline, he said.

Rates have already gone up as SAWS has developed new sources of water in order to rely less on the Edwards Aquifer, which is restricted during droughts, like the current one that started four years ago.

Williams and Andrew Sansom, executive director of The Meadows Center for Water & the Environment, said the days of cheap water must inevitably come to an end, especially for high-volume users, to promote conservation.

“We have never priced this precious substance anywhere near what its value to us is,” Sansom said.

To help low-income customers who only use a few thousand gallons per month, SAWS has said it will create a “lifeline” rate in lieu of its current affordability programs. SAWS now has affordability programs that follow formulas the city's Department of Human Services applies for various types of services.

shuddleston@express-news.net