San Antonio council receives update on Edwards Aquifer protection program
January 15, 2025 | San Antonio, Bexar County, Texas
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
San Antonio city officials and conservation partners delivered an update to the City Council on Jan. 15 on the Edwards Aquifer protection program, describing how the program identifies and protects sensitive recharge and contribution areas, how properties are acquired or protected through restrictions on future development, and how the effort is funded.
The Edwards Aquifer supplies roughly half of the city's drinking water, officials said, making protection of the recharge zone a priority. City staff described a multi-step, science-driven process for identifying properties, negotiating with landowners and monitoring conservation agreements once they are in place.
Grant Tausand, identified in the presentation as the city's parks and recreation manager, told councilmembers the program uses a GIS-based scientific evaluation to rank properties by hydrologic sensitivity, ecological value and size. Tausand said the program either acquires properties outright or purchases or secures development rights so landowners retain use of the land but limit future development.
Tausand said municipal funding has been used alongside federal and state grants. He described roughly $30 million in municipal program funds to date and said staff have leveraged approximately $32 million in federal and state dollars and partnership funding. For fiscal 2025, he said the city has approved $10 million in the adopted budget for additional acquisitions.
Councilmembers asked for specifics about how restrictive conservation terms are and how monitoring works. Staff said participation is voluntary, that landowners retain ownership and typical restrictions focus on limiting future development rights rather than day-to-day uses such as ranching. Staff described those limits as commonly constraining future development to a small fraction of a property's area — staff used the range of about 0.5% to 1% in their explanation.
On monitoring, staff said each conserved property is checked at least annually by city staff or under memoranda of understanding with partners such as the Edwards Aquifer Authority. Monitoring looks for significant changes in ecological condition relative to baseline visits and the parties use established inspection points; staff said some properties can be monitored in a single day while expansive ranches may require two or three days.
Speakers highlighted the program's long history and partnerships. Tausand said the program traces back to citizen advocacy in the 1970s and voter-authorized funding measures in 2005, 2010 and 2015. Presenters named partners including The Nature Conservancy, local land-conservation organizations and the Edwards Aquifer Authority; Councilmember comments also referenced CPS Energy and other regional agencies.
Councilmembers praised the program's role in protecting drinking water and pressed staff on measurable targets. One councilmember noted staff statements that the program had 'protected 187 acres' early in the presentation and later referenced '100,000 acres' and an aspiration toward '200,000 acres.
City staff acknowledged they have identified target areas — particularly the recharge zone west of the city stretching from Uvalde through Bexar and Medina counties — but emphasized that because participation is voluntary the number of acres ultimately conserved depends on willing landowners. Tausand said staff have identified high-priority parcels covering about 25% of the recharge zone but that a firm, citywide acreage goal has not been set as a mandatory target.
Councilmembers asked whether state legislation could affect the program; staff said the program operates under the city's ordinance and under existing authorities that, since amendments in the mid-2000s, allow acquisitions in counties outside the municipal limits when appropriate for protection. Staff reiterated that acquisitions and conservation easements are voluntary transactions with property owners.
Councilmembers also asked how the city presents the program's financial offers to long-held family properties; staff said the program typically offers a payment for development rights that allows owners to remain on and use the land while providing the city enforceable limits on future development.
Council members and speakers urged continued outreach and semiannual reporting; Tausand said staff plan to provide progress updates at least twice a year.
The council did not take formal action on the presentation; the session moved afterward to a separate agenda item.
The Edwards Aquifer supplies roughly half of the city's drinking water, officials said, making protection of the recharge zone a priority. City staff described a multi-step, science-driven process for identifying properties, negotiating with landowners and monitoring conservation agreements once they are in place.
Grant Tausand, identified in the presentation as the city's parks and recreation manager, told councilmembers the program uses a GIS-based scientific evaluation to rank properties by hydrologic sensitivity, ecological value and size. Tausand said the program either acquires properties outright or purchases or secures development rights so landowners retain use of the land but limit future development.
Tausand said municipal funding has been used alongside federal and state grants. He described roughly $30 million in municipal program funds to date and said staff have leveraged approximately $32 million in federal and state dollars and partnership funding. For fiscal 2025, he said the city has approved $10 million in the adopted budget for additional acquisitions.
Councilmembers asked for specifics about how restrictive conservation terms are and how monitoring works. Staff said participation is voluntary, that landowners retain ownership and typical restrictions focus on limiting future development rights rather than day-to-day uses such as ranching. Staff described those limits as commonly constraining future development to a small fraction of a property's area — staff used the range of about 0.5% to 1% in their explanation.
On monitoring, staff said each conserved property is checked at least annually by city staff or under memoranda of understanding with partners such as the Edwards Aquifer Authority. Monitoring looks for significant changes in ecological condition relative to baseline visits and the parties use established inspection points; staff said some properties can be monitored in a single day while expansive ranches may require two or three days.
Speakers highlighted the program's long history and partnerships. Tausand said the program traces back to citizen advocacy in the 1970s and voter-authorized funding measures in 2005, 2010 and 2015. Presenters named partners including The Nature Conservancy, local land-conservation organizations and the Edwards Aquifer Authority; Councilmember comments also referenced CPS Energy and other regional agencies.
Councilmembers praised the program's role in protecting drinking water and pressed staff on measurable targets. One councilmember noted staff statements that the program had 'protected 187 acres' early in the presentation and later referenced '100,000 acres' and an aspiration toward '200,000 acres.
City staff acknowledged they have identified target areas — particularly the recharge zone west of the city stretching from Uvalde through Bexar and Medina counties — but emphasized that because participation is voluntary the number of acres ultimately conserved depends on willing landowners. Tausand said staff have identified high-priority parcels covering about 25% of the recharge zone but that a firm, citywide acreage goal has not been set as a mandatory target.
Councilmembers asked whether state legislation could affect the program; staff said the program operates under the city's ordinance and under existing authorities that, since amendments in the mid-2000s, allow acquisitions in counties outside the municipal limits when appropriate for protection. Staff reiterated that acquisitions and conservation easements are voluntary transactions with property owners.
Councilmembers also asked how the city presents the program's financial offers to long-held family properties; staff said the program typically offers a payment for development rights that allows owners to remain on and use the land while providing the city enforceable limits on future development.
Council members and speakers urged continued outreach and semiannual reporting; Tausand said staff plan to provide progress updates at least twice a year.
The council did not take formal action on the presentation; the session moved afterward to a separate agenda item.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meetingSponsors
Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Texas articles free in 2025
