By Marty Kufus

In a case of the media and strange bedfellows, a local representative to regional water planning, a Wilson County activist, and a SAWS official pooh-poohed Saturday’s San Antonio Express-News column about the "Cibolo Reservoir."
One of them labeled writer Roddy Stinson’s column "silly, as in foolish."
A large reservoir in central Wilson County has been studied by the San Antonio Water System and other entities, but that "option" failed to make it into the plan completed in January by the South Central Texas Regional Water Planning Group.
The "Region L" plan was formally approved two weeks ago by the Texas Water Development Board after some technical criticisms were answered.
On Saturday, Stinson’s column appeared under the ambiguous headline, "Future SAWS reservoir sites include Cibolo (no, scratch that)."
"The conflict between water-needy San Antonians and their let-them-drink-drool neighbors just got more tense," the column began dramatically.
A July 9 report HDR Engineering Inc., prepared for SAWS listed the Cibolo Reservoir in an inventory of potential reservoir sites, Stinson wrote.
"Putting [Cibolo Reservoir] in print is the equivalent of waving a red flag at a bull in Wilson County…," he wrote. SAWS officials told him the Cibolo was not in the regional water plan.
"‘We’re not looking at it,’ they [SAWS officials] insisted. ‘We are just doing an inventory, but not in the context of pursuing a reservoir,’" he continued. "I promised that I would include that assurance in this column. (Wilson Countians can decide for themselves whether to go back to sleep or run to the barn to sharpen their sickles and scythes.)"
The column, which quoted some technical data, did not mention that the consulting engineers’ study began in 1998.
A copy of the HDR report, with data on 38 low-lying sites of various sizes "in and around Bexar County," was delivered Monday to the Wilson County News by a SAWS employee.
It listed a starting date of July 1998. That was the first year of regional water planning, in which SAWS is a participant.
In 1999 through much of 2000, Region L planners pored over reports by HDR (a major engineering consultant in Texas) that eventually would focus on the "Cibolo" as the most likely candidate for a new reservoir.
In the end, a majority of the planners were swayed away from that controversial option. The plan they sent to the water board in January contained no recommendations for large, new reservoirs.
Susan Butler, SAWS’ director of the water-resources department, Monday denied the suggestion the water system would embark alone on a reservoir project that failed to make it into a regional plan.
"SAWS is not pursuing the Cibolo Reservoir," she said in a telephone interview. Butler admitted she was concerned how Wilson County residents would react to Stinson’s column.
As set out in 1997’s Senate Bill 1, regional planning is ongoing. It anticipates the projected regional population and water demands for the year 2050. The water board currently is creating a state plan from these first installments of the 16 regional plans.
Darrell Brownlow, a self-employed geologist and Region L planner who lives near Floresville, is distrustful of SAWS. But, he said he felt Stinson’s column was misleading and probably a disservice to concerned residents here.
"I’ve read the [column] seven times, and each time I come away shaking my head trying to figure out what target Roddy is shooting at," Brownlow told a WCN reporter. "Then I conclude that he truly is just trying to stir a pot, any pot."
In regional planning, Brownlow has been one of the staunchest advocates for rural counties and small businesses, more than once locking horns with SAWS’ representatives. The Region L group represents water-user groups and interests in 20-1/2 counties.
Stockdale-area resident Diane Savage, the chairman of the Wilson County Water Action Project, is a regular spectator and public-comments speaker at the regional meetings. In his column, Stinson recycled a March 2000 newspaper quote of Savage, a vocal opponent of the Cibolo proposal.
Even so, Savage said Sunday she thought the column was "silly, as in foolish."
"While I appreciate his concern, he [Stinson] doesn’t need to worry that the citizens of Wilson County are sleeping," she said. "We continue to stay very involved in the water-planning process and we continue to work within that process.… We are aware the Cibolo Reservoir is currently not in the regional water plan."
Savage and Brownlow both wondered aloud how much research went into the Express-News column. (Stinson has never attended any Region L meetings or workshops, planning-group spokesman Steve Raabe confirmed Monday.)
"The results of the last three years of legislatively mandated water planning has identified that Bexar County will need to nearly double its water supply in order to meet its 50-year growth projections," Brownlow said.
"This new water supply must be imported into Bexar County; as a result, it is no secret that water-storage facilities must be constructed in order to treat and manage these new water sources," he said. "The where, when, and how of this is yet to be determined. I’m certain that this will be part of the next round of regional water planning."
"Faced with such a daunting task as doubling its water supply, I would think that it is only reasonable for SAWS to perform an inventory of potential reservoir sites in and around Bexar County," he said.
"However, until such a project or combination of projects is presented and approved by the regional water planning group — including its public input process — which to date has not happened, such technical studies are simply that: technical studies to develop and understand all alternatives and possibilities," Brownlow said.
"If Mr. Stinson is truly concerned about alerting Wilson County residents to the dangers of living next door to San Antonio, maybe he should focus on SAWS’ planned wholesale mining of the Carrizo Aquifer in southwest Bexar County, just across the fence and out of reach of the Evergreen Underground Water Conservation District," Brownlow said.
The reference to "let-them-drink-drool neighbors," he added, was offensive and undeserved given San Antonio’s history of water controversies including the "Applewhite Reservoir" fiasco.
A WCN reporter contacted Stinson by e-mail Monday and asked questions about the column, its purpose, and whether it showed "a big-city contempt for non-urban residents."
Stinson replied simply, "Do you really believe everything the bureaucrats tell you? God help your readers."

In Austin, the Texas Water Development Board July 18 approved Region L’s plan — the last of the 16 from across the state.
The water board’s technical staff months ago identified several problems in Region L’s three-volume plan. The most troubling criticism, to planners and their consultants, was the staff’s belief that a major river-diversion proposal would constitute an "inter-basin transfer."
Planners and their HDR consultants had considered a proposed pipeline diversion of the lower Guadalupe River, below its confluence with the San Antonio River near the coast, not to be an interbasin transfer.
The movement of water from one river basin to another would receive junior-rights status and be subject to more stringent "environmental criteria." In that case, the Guadalupe project would be less reliable to the region, planners agreed.
A revision to the plan was proposed in June, which the water board ultimately accepted.
The Region L plan has been revised to show two possible scenarios for the lower Guadalupe project.
In one scenario, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission would issue a permit for an interbasin transfer. In the second scenario, the project would not be an interbasin transfer.
The river’s diversion is part of a larger project listed in the plan as "SCTN-16." The San Antonio River Authority, SAWS, and the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority already are collaborating in its development.
HDR Engineering has calculated the possible effects of an interbasin-transfer status.
"The result of the analysis showed that SCTN-16 had a yield of 94,500 [acre-feet a year] if it was not an interbasin transfer, and a yield of 48,600 if it was an interbasin transfer," Raabe said.
An acre-foot equals 325,860 gallons.
The Region L planning group’s next meeting will begin at 10 a.m., Thursday at the San Antonio River Authority.
News coverage of regional planning, and related topics, dating back to September 1999 is archived in "Water Related Issues" at www.wilsoncounty news.com.