San Angelo City Council Set Vote to Spend Millions on New Water Source

 

SAN ANGELO, TX – The San Angelo city council has scheduled a special meeting Tuesday to vote on a new water supply.

According to a report to the council, they will consider approving an interlocal agreement between the City of San Angelo, the City of Abilene, and the City of Midland and authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute all related documents for a long term water supply.

The West Texas Water Partnership has considered a host of options over the past decade, and listened to all manner of proposals. As a result of this, the cities in the partnership finally found in Fort Stockton Holdings, L.P. (FSH) a supply of water that meets the group's fundamental criteria that was defined by them as affordability, quantity, quality, sustainability, and reliability.

FSH owns a groundwater production and transport permit that allows FSH to produce and use 28,400 acre feet of Edwards-Trinity groundwater each year. The annual volume is being split in a manner that addresses each city's needs. Population, current supplies, and variety of factors drive the allocation between the three cities.

  • Midland - 15,000 acre-ft / year
  • Abilene - 8,400 acre-ft / year
  • San Angelo - 5,000 acre-ft / year

The City of Midland will consider on May 12 to execute an Untreated Groundwater Supply contract with FSH for the purchase of 28,400 acre feet of groundwater. The contract allows Midland to transfer or assign all or part of the contract to one or more assignees. The interlocal will be the agreement between all parties to assign 5,000 acre-feet and 8,400 acre-feet to San Angelo and Abilene, respectively. The contract and assignments will begin on the effective date and continue until December 31, 2070. The Cities will have the opportunity to extend the contract term until 2090, and then again until 2110.

The engineer’s total project estimate for the wellfield, pipeline, associated transmission infrastructure, and treatment facility is $300 million. With the City’s portion of the total volume, this would put the City’s split of the capital infrastructure at an estimated $52.8 million. Operating costs have been projected to be very similar to the operating costs of the Hickory system.

The City has identified a funding source for the water through the San Angelo Development Corporation. Seventy-two percent of that corporation’s revenue is restricted for future water supply and that revenue stream could support the cost associated with the payment for 5,000 acre feet of water.

The payments for water will be as follows:

  • From the date the contract goes into effect until January 1, 2025, the City will pay $0.30625 per 1,000 gallons. The payment for 2020 will be prorated for the calendar year.
  • The rate increases to $0.3425 per 1,000 gallons on January 1, 2025 and will remain the same through December 31, 2029.
  • Beginning January 1, 2030, the rate increases to $0.55 per 1,000 gallons.
  • On January 1, 2031, and through the remainder of the contract term, the rate increases by 0.5% of the rate in effect for the previous year.

The city's current water solo-owned supply consists of Lake Nasworthy, Twin Buttes Reservoir, O.C. Fisher Reservoir, E.V. Spence Reservoir, and the Hickory Aquifer wellfield. The partnership also has a water procurment deal to use water from the O.H. Ivie Reservoir.

The city council has also approved a $100 million plan to reuse its wastewater. 

Subscribe to the LIVE! Daily

The LIVE! Daily is the "newspaper to your email" for San Angelo. Each content-packed edition has weather, the popular Top of the Email opinion and rumor mill column, news around the state of Texas, news around west Texas, the latest news stories from San Angelo LIVE!, events, and the most recent obituaries. The bottom of the email contains the most recent rants and comments. The LIVE! daily is emailed 5 days per week. On Sundays, subscribers receive the West Texas Real Estate LIVE! email.

Required

Most Recent Videos

Comments

I completely understand, and even agree with the city's continuous search and investigation into water sources. I don't have a problem with the agreement that's been reached. I do have a problem with the city's reluctance to upgrade the water plant in town. There's been talk over the years - and I think at one time someone actually had a plan in the works to upgrade and improve that antique water plant. With a population that shows not much slowing down in growth - why do we continue to operate a water plant built/designed when the population was a third of what it is now? We need work done on the water infrastructure besides bandaging up the broken pipes!

Post a comment to this article here:

X Close