Water Bills Drying Up
May 15th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Back in April we wondered whether long-overdue water legislation promoting conservation and environmental flows would get caught in the crosshairs of a fight over designating new reservoirs. Damn, we hate being right.
Here’s how Speaker Tom Craddick explained the situation in a statement a week ago: “The House already passed two of the three major components of SB 3, environmental flows (HB 3) and water conservation (HB 4), and we are waiting on the Senate to act on them. There is only one major statewide water issue left for the House to consider, reservoir designation, which is more controversial in nature.”
He goes on: “SB 3 is broad in nature and has the potential to extend well beyond its intent. Additionally, it was amended in committee with changes deemed negative by reservoir advocates. If the Senate would send over its [stand-alone] reservoir designation bill [SB 675], there would still be an opportunity to reach a possible compromise on this issue.”
So, Lite Guv Dewhurst wants the House to take up his water omnibus bill, SB 3, while Craddick prefers a piecemeal approach. Dewhurst is holding up HB 3 and HB 4 in the Senate and Craddick has SB 3 as a hostage in the House. Now, don’t get bogged down in the alphabet soup of bills here. Suffice it to say, this a silly standoff that’s jeopardizing the non-controversial conservation and environmental flows components. Putting off this much-needed and sensible water policy, which has virtually no public opposition, for another two years is utter folly.
Craddick and Dewhurst don’t disagree on the issues; they both favor new reservoirs and are not opposed to the conservation and environmental flows components. This is all about politics and who gets the credit for major legislation. Dewhurst wants to have a big, impressive water package he can campaign on when he runs for governor. Craddick is just being doltish.
“What’s going on here is a little bit of jockeying for bragging rights between the House and the Senate and the leadership of the bodies,” said Ken Kramer of the Sierra Club.
Craddick probably also fears what may ensue if SB 3 were to hit the floor. In the Democratic-controlled House Natural Resources committee, SB 3 was stripped of four reservoirs, including the controversial Marvin Nichols and Lake Fastrill, and language was added that would require reservoir builders to make encumbrance payments to landowners flooded out of their property. The water suppliers and Chamber of Commerce types in North Texas - the main forces behind the reservoirs - hate this concept because it could make building new lakes prohibitively expensive. They want their dams and don’t give a damn that the rest of the state views Dallas-Fort Worth and the surrounding ‘burbs as greedy, St. Augustine-lawn-loving water hogs.
A floor fight would almost certainly ensue over these issues, pitting Dallas-Forth Worth representatives like Rep. Rafael Anchia (D-Dallas) against rural East Texas lawmakers such as Rep. Mike “Tuffy” Hamilton (R-Mauriceville) and Rep. Stephen Frost (D-New Boston). Amendments would fly like confetti. At this point in the game - with his power in tatters - that’s probably more than Craddick could stomach. Craddick has until next Tuesday to schedule a debate for SB 3.
Kramer says he’s still optimistic. “I really believe that at the end of the day we’re going to have [passed] at least the environmental flows legislation and I hope the conservation legislation.”
UPDATE: Rep. Puente told the Observer earlier today that SB 3 is expected on the floor either this Friday or early next week. He said certain groups have reached a compromise on the reservoirs issue, relieving the stalemate. Specifically, the Texas Farm Bureau, the Cattlemen’s Association and other landowner interests have found a middle ground they can live with in regards to property owner protections. Puente expects enough votes to put Marvin Nichols and Lake Fastrill back into the bill. “It’s an ominous and omnibus bill,” Puente remarked. That’s because every rep with a foundering water bill is going to try to attach it to SB 3.
