WTP4: Council Takes a Swig

The funding spigot for Water Treatment Plant No. 4 has opened from a steady trickle to full blast, with City Council authorizing lump-sum funding of $300 million to build the controversial plant in a move opponents say strips construction of oversight, while proponents claim it will help bring the plant in on time and on budget.

The item changing funding from a per-project basis to an overall appropriation consumed the first half of the council meeting, prompting speakers in favor (business and booster types, including developer Terry Mitchell, and speakers from the Austin Cham­ber of Commerce and Austin Board of Realtors) and against (the Save Our Springs Alliance, the Austin chapter of the Sierra Club, and speakers from the Spicewood Springs neighborhood, where a plant-related underground shaft is slated for construction). While many speakers trod familiar ground – essentially arguing for water security vs. cost and the perils of promoting growth – the nature of the one-time, $300 million appropriation to the construction manager-at-risk contract with MWH Construct­ors reframed the conversation. Austin Water Director Greg Meszaros said the funding would give the manager greater flexibility when looking at bids, while opponents feared it removed oversight provisions. "We have been told at every turn, because of citizen involvement and oversight from the boards and commissions, that this project has been improved, and this would take that out of the equation," said the Sierra Club's Roy Whaley.

Laura Morrison argued the funding decision defers "completely to staff," which was "not a comfortable position" for her. Bill Spelman joined her, saying: "I'm not clear that this particular approach is going to improve value for taxpayers. But I'm persuaded that it probably will be more flexible. Whether that flexibility actually works to the advantage of the water utility and the taxpayers remains to be seen." Chris Riley homed in on the scope of work, vis-à-vis lingering questions about whether the $300 million would include construction of the Forest Ridge transmission main, which the utility hasn't spent much time addressing, having focused its attention on the Jollyville transmission line (the component necessitating the controversial Spicewood Springs shaft). Assistant City Manager Rudy Garza's short answer: "If we can build it within $359 million" – the $300 million plus $59 million previously appropriated – "yes."

"There are still judgments to be made about whether, in fact, we will need that main," said Riley. "In fact, the action today will enable you to build it – as long as they are under the $359 [million] figure, they can build it without any further action on the part of the council. I think that it's inappropriate for us to defer those decisions."

However, any hope the added financial consideration might tip the long-running 4-3 vote in favor of the plant didn't come to pass, as the appropriation passed along traditional lines, with Morrison, Spelman, and Riley voting no. Sheryl Cole, the chair of council's Audit and Finance Committee, seemed most likely to peel off; she prefaced her vote with a lengthy discussion of her concerns, peppered with questions for staff. But after establishing that regular reports would be delivered to the Audit and Finance Committee, along with other city boards and commissions, she again voted in favor. "I put in place directives to ensure that we will have quarterly reporting to Audit and Finance, and the project reports will go to Water and Wastewater committee," Cole said afterward. Echoing remarks she made on the dais, she said, "The fact we approved the budget on all three readings on 7-0 is a strong statement that even though we might disagree on policy issues, when it comes to the ultimate finances of the city, we stand united."

Despite the funding approval, one more big WTP4 debate looms before year's end; at the meeting, council scheduled a Dec. 16 hearing and vote on the use of parkland for the Spicewood Springs shaft.