Reservoirs have rebounded, but the fight over water isn’t over in Corpus Christi. The City Council has ordered a public referendum on a citizen-led petition that would sharply increase the price of water for industrial facilities during drought.
The proposal is expected to face a litany of legal challenges before November’s election.
It would add millions of dollars in fees to the region’s largest water users, including ExxonMobil, Occidental Chemical and Valero, the next time reservoir levels are below 30 percent full, like they were for 29 months until early August. Community and environmental groups gathered nearly 13,000 signatures of registered voters to get their proposal on the ballot.
“This was a lot of signatures,” said Corpus Christi Mayor Pro-tem Kaylynn Paxson at the City Council meeting Tuesday evening. “This is something that doesn’t happen every day. I am very proud and amazed to say that this actually took place.”
The 6-2 vote to call a special election on the referendum followed years of growing tensions between the public in Corpus Christi and the industrial giants that consume enormous amounts of water. As the region’s main reservoirs fell from 30 percent full in March of 2024 to less than eight percent full in May of this year, residents clamored for authorities to curtail water consumption at refineries and chemical plants.
Activists began to circulate the petition for the referendum, called the Fair Water Amendment, this year as Corpus Christi came perilously close to running out of water. Dozens of volunteers for a local organization called For the Greater Good along with paid canvassers from Texas Campaign for the Environment spent months gathering signatures.
“Something that seemed impossible gave me hope in our democracy,” said Miriam Guerra-Rachidy, a member of For the Greater Good, in comments to the City Council on Tuesday. “It gave me hope in believing that the people can make a difference.”
The region no longer faces an imminent threat of disaster after a rainy spring and summer replenished its main reservoir system, currently 42 percent full.
The Fair Water Amendment would implement a 70 percent water rate increase for Corpus Christi’s largest industrial water users when reservoirs dip below 30 percent capacity. It would implement an increase of 140 percent when reservoirs dip below 20 percent, and a 280 percent increase if the city declares a water emergency.
Even advocates for the proposal expect to face lawsuits from industry groups in coming months.
“It’s gonna be challenged, no doubt,” said Sylvia Campos, a City Council member who campaigned for the amendment. “That’s the nature of the beast.”
Several parts of the proposed amendment will be easy to challenge, said Corpus Christi City Manager Peter Zanoni. The proposal requires rate increases for industrial complexes that buy their water directly from the city as well as those that buy their water from intermediaries like water districts or towns.
Corpus Christi supplies water to its entire seven-county region, including more than 20 other cities and towns.
“They don’t report to me or this City Council. They’re whole and separate entities, so we can’t set their rates for them,” Zanoni told the City Council Tuesday. “You don’t have the authority to do that.”
The city’s direct industrial customers could also contest the proposed drought surcharge at the state’s Public Utility Commission, where they are already fighting the city’s current water rate and demanding an $80 million refund.
In approving the ballot measure Tuesday, Corpus Christi City Council rejected the advice of its own legal counsel, who recommended officials block the referendum under an obscure state law that bans municipal charter amendments related to climate change.
If the City Council passed an ordinance that labeled the Fair Water Amendment as related to climate change, it wouldn’t be allowed on the ballot without approval from the state Legislature, Interim City Attorney Buck Brice wrote in a city memo.
But council member Gil Hernandez, who disagreed with levying the surcharge on large industrial water users, said he did not think the Fair Water Amendment could be categorized as “climate change” related.
“It’s too much of a stretch,” Hernandez said. “Even though I disagree with the contents of the amendment. I’m not going to do acrobatic acts to try and make this climate change.”
For Isabel Araiza, organizer of the petition drive and a founder of For the Greater Good, Tuesday’s vote was the climax of a yearslong organizing campaign. She said the fear and severity of this year’s water crisis energized the community to take action.
With the proposal on November’s ballot, Araiza said organizers will launch a new campaign of education and awareness before the election.
“Civic engagement is flourishing and it’s beautiful,” said Araiza, a local college professor. “The powerful industry [doesn’t] want people to recognize their power, and people are recognizing their power.”
Neena Satija of the Texas Newsroom contributed to this report.
Disclosure: Valero has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in The Texas Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
This article first appeared on The Texas Tribune.