AUSTIN, Texas (KBTX) -A billion dollars a year. That’s how much Texas lawmakers want to pour into water infrastructure, setting the stage for high-stakes discussions on securing the state’s future water supply.
For years, rural Texans, especially in places like Lee, Burleson, and Milam counties, have been asking the big question—not how much money the state is spending, but where that water will come from and who gets to control it.
Lee County Judge Frank Malinak says communities like his are already feeling the squeeze as local groundwater is pumped away to supply fast-growing urban areas.
“There’s a lot of water leaving Lee, Burleson, and Milam counties that is being transferred out of this area,” Malinak said. “And it’s all coming from our underground aquifers.”
Malinak, who has been following water issues closely, worries the studies that originally justified large-scale groundwater pumping may have underestimated its long-term impact.
“Some of the studies that have been done, it seems like, may have been incorrect years ago,” he said. “So, are the current studies going to be correct? Are groundwater districts doing the right thing by issuing these export permits?”
He’s not pointing fingers, just hoping lawmakers take a hard look at how rural communities fit into the bigger picture of Texas’ water future.
A Push for New Water Supply—Not More Pumping
One of the biggest proposals this session is Senate Bill 7, filed by Sen. Charles Perry, which would create a dedicated funding stream for water infrastructure. The goal? Build new water supplies rather than keep draining existing ones.
Andy Weir, executive director of the Simsboro Aquifer Water Defense Fund, says that’s a huge shift from the way Texas has traditionally handled water issues.
“This constitutional amendment, the dedicated funding, would help to reduce that pressure and eventually turn it around to where we’re getting a supply from new water from new projects, new technology,” Weir said. “And I’m very hopeful for that.”
The plan focuses on desalination, aquifer storage, and water recycling—not more groundwater pumping. That’s a key point for rural landowners, who have long fought against what they see as unfair water grabs.
“The rules on that is it can’t be the same old ‘Rob Peter to pay Paul,’ take all this water out of Lee County and ship it in a pipeline to San Antonio,” Weir said. “Those type of projects will not qualify for this money.”
Who Will Control the Money?
While Perry’s bill aims to lock in funding for sustainable water projects, there’s already a battle brewing over who gets to decide where the money goes.
“The Senate wants 80% of the funding to go strictly to new water supply,” Weir explained. “The House wants to leave it up to the Water Development Board to allocate however they see fit.”
That debate is critical because big cities still want to tap into rural groundwater. If the funding isn’t tightly controlled, some worry the money could end up supporting more water transfers instead of real solutions.
Water Loss and Waste in the Spotlight
One issue gaining traction in the legislature is municipal water loss—how much water major cities waste due to leaky pipes and outdated infrastructure.
Weir recalled a conversation with a Lee County rancher whose well went dry after the Vista Ridge pipeline project started shipping groundwater to San Antonio.
Old pipes cause Texas cities to lose tens of billions of gallons of water each year
“She woke up one morning with no water,” he said. “She had to figure out if there was enough in the tank for the cattle, for the house. And pump installers were booked up because everyone’s wells went dry at the same time.”
Then, in what Weir called a gut-punch moment, that same rancher opened a newspaper and saw a report that San Antonio had lost as much water through its pipes as it had pumped from Central Texas aquifers.
“They pumped 50,000 acre-feet to San Antonio, and 20% of it disappears into a black hole after it leaves the treatment plant,” Weir said. “She was almost in tears. After all this, they didn’t even get the water.”
That moment led to House Bill 29, a proposal to hold cities accountable for water loss. The bill has since become a top priority in the Texas House.
A New Approach to Groundwater Management?
For the first time in years, groundwater conservation districts in Central Texas are taking a harder stance on long-term water planning. In the past, they allowed deeper and deeper pumping. But now, with better science and more public pressure, those districts are holding the line.
“They’ve decided their target is ‘we’re not going to go any deeper this round,’” Weir said. “And that’s encouraging because that means we’re going to have water as a legacy for our Texas citizens.”
Instead of just setting pumping limits, conservation districts are starting to express water availability in real-world terms—a shift that could help landowners and cities plan better.
“In the past, they just said there’s gonna be an average drawdown of 280 feet,” Weir said. “What does that mean to you? Does that mean you’re gonna have water or not? Could you tell from that expression if you’re gonna go belly up in 10 years, 30 years?”
Now, they’re putting it in clearer terms.
“That 280 feet means 60% of the water that was available is still going to be there 50 years from now,” Weir said. “Now that’s helpful. That gives me a benchmark. That tells me, ‘OK, can I pass my ranch on to my kids?”
Water Legislation Gains Momentum Among Brazos Valley Lawmakers
State Rep. Stan Gerdes, R-Smithville, and Sen. Lois Kolkhorst, R-Brenham, have filed a series of bills this session aimed at improving water management and conservation, including:
• SB 624 (Kolkhorst): Adjusts criteria for groundwater conservation district permits, requiring consideration of impacts on existing water resources, conservation efforts, and compliance with management plans.
• HB 29 (Gerdes): Requires large municipally owned water utilities to conduct water loss audits and develop mitigation plans if their leakage rates exceed certain thresholds. The bill introduces fines for utilities that fail to address excessive water loss.
• HB 1523 (Gerdes): Prohibits certain aquifer storage and recovery projects using Class V injection wells in specific counties, strengthening local oversight.
• HB 1633 (Gerdes) & SB 624 (Kolkhorst): Expands the criteria groundwater conservation districts must consider before issuing permits, ensuring impacts on registered wells are evaluated.
• HB 1689 (Gerdes): Allows groundwater districts to use export fees to maintain affected wells and invest in alternative water supplies.
• HB 1690 (Gerdes): Strengthens notification requirements for groundwater export permits, ensuring transparency for neighboring counties.
• HB 2034 (Gerdes): Blocks foreign entities from certain countries from obtaining groundwater permits in Texas.
• HB 2077 & HB 2078 (Gerdes): Revises the appeals process for groundwater management decisions and updates long-term planning for groundwater conservation districts.
• HB 2080 (Gerdes): Expands the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s oversight of groundwater districts.
• HB 2605 (Gerdes): Reinforces municipal water loss reporting and mitigation requirements.
What’s Next?
With months left in the session, rural leaders say they’ll be watching closely to make sure money goes toward real solutions—not just more pipelines. Meanwhile, lawmakers are under pressure to take water loss and conservation more seriously.
For Weir, Malinak, and others, this session could be a turning point.
“We’re not trying to do things the old way,” Weir said. “We need to have a legacy of water and not just profit in the moment.”
For news updates, follow Donnie Tuggle on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Instagram.
If there’s something you would like KBTX Investigative Reporter Donnie Tuggle to look into, email Donnie.Tuggle@KBTX.com or fill out this submission form.
Copyright 2025 KBTX. All rights reserved.