Texas Research League Analyzes, October 1966 Page: 2 of 2
[2] p. ; 26 x 21 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
thirds of the Legislature. The Texas Water Development
Board was created to administer the Fund.
In 1961 the Constitutional provisions dealing with the
Fund were amended to permit investments in local or fed-
eral projects for water storage purposes. State money could
be loaned for projects including reservoirs, pipelines or
canals, treatment plants or even recreational areas. Fund
moneys could be used to buy storage space but not convey-
ance facilities or other works. Only $50 million of the
Fund could be used under these storage-purchase provisions.
Then in 1965 the Legislature authorized the Water De-
velopment Board to issue the second $100 million of the
original $200 million bond issue, and removed the $50
million limit on the use of the Fund for investments in
water storage projects.
The Fund operates on a rotating principle. As loans to
local governments are repaid to the State, additional funds
are available for other projects. Investments by the State
in the purchase of storage space will be recouped when the
need for the water reaches the point that the supply can be
sold. These investments by the State permit reservoirs to
be built to optimum size at considerable savings over later
reservoir enlargement when water needs justify the in-
creased size.
Up to the end of the 1966 fiscal year (August 31st), the
Board had issued $85 million of the first $100 million in
bonds, with more than $83 million still outstanding.
THE CHANGES PROPOSED
BY PROPOSITION 11
Three changes are proposed for the Development Fund
by the Constitutional Amendment sought by Proposition 11.
1. An additional $200 million in bonds would
be authorized for the Fund, bringing the total
State commitment to $400 million.
These additional bonds could be issued by the Devel-
opment Board only when-and in the amounts-authorized
by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. The total of $400
million would still be only ten per cent of the estimated
total cost of water development for Texas. As stated pre-
viously, the State's loans and investments would all eventu-
ally be repaid by water users.
2. The Development Board would be authorized
to use the Fund to buy or build facilities asso-
ciated with reservoir projects, including any
system necessary for the transportation of
water to wholesale purchasers.
At present, loans may be made to local governments to
build associated works and facilities, but the State may not
build or buy such facilities. The principal problem which
Texas faces in water development is the dislocation of
supply in terms of demand; both our cities and industries
are having to reach farther afield to find new water sup-
ply sources. All interregional projects of the future will
have to include major conveyance works.
3. "The Texas Water Development Fund or any
other State fupd provided for water develop-
ment, transmission, transfer or filtration shall
not be used to finance any project which con-
templates or results in the removal from the
basin of origin of any surface water necessary
to supply the reasonably foreseeable future wa-
ter requirements for the next ensuing fifty-
year period within the river basin of origin,
except on a temporary, interim basis."This third provision is a "protection clause" written into
the Constitution to protect river basins against having too
much of their future water supply dedicated through proj-
ect development to the supply of needs in neighboring
basins. This same provision is contained in the existing
statutes pertaining to the development of a State water
plan.
The Issue of State Responsibility
Without commenting pro or con on the financing issue
at stake in Proposition 11, we would conclude by quoting
from an observation contained in Volume I of the League's
water development study. In recommending measures to
strengthen the State water agencies-measures which the
59th Texas Legislature later enacted-the League's re-
port offered this observation:
"The prestige of the State, its Governor, its State
water agencies and its water leaders has now been
placed irrevocably behind the effort to make an
effective State Water Plan and to assume the re-
sponsibilities for leadership in Texas water devel-
opment. In a very real sense, State government is
on trial. . . . No other state has managed to com-
plete the job Texas has now undertaken, and no
other state has faced such a formidable array of
obstacles to State leadership. The obstacles include
the massive involvement of the federal agencies,
the historic strength and independence of regional
water authorities, the confusion in water rights
administration, and the lateness of the State's ef-
fort.
"If Texas should fail in its attempt to take over the
direction of its own water development-and co-
incidentally the course of its economic growth-
the 'renaissance of State responsibility' which Gov-
ernor Connally proclaimed in his 1963 inaugural
address might never come to pass. This is the
challenge the State faces."A citizen.supported nonprofit, nonpolitical educational corporation
engaged in objective, factual research into the operations, programs
and problems o Texas government.
OFFICERS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, 1966
1. F. BETTS (CHAIRMAN)
CHAIRMAN OF BOARD, THE AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK, BEAUMONT
S. J. HAY, (VICE CHAIRMAN)
CHAIRMAN OF BOARD, GREAT NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. DALLAS
GROGAN LORD, (SECRETARY TREASURER)
PRESIDENT. TEXAS CAPITAL CORPORATION. GEORGETOWN
ALVIN A. BURGER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
MR. 1. F. BETTS, CHAIRMAN OF BOARD, THE AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK,
BEAUMONT; MR. LEWIS BOGUS. SR., PRESIDENT, LEWIS BOGGUS
MOTORS. INC.. HARLINGEN; MR. GEORGE R. BROWN, CHAIRMAN OF
BOARD, BROWN & ROOT, INC., HOUSTON: MR. WALTER N. CORRIGAN,
PRESIDENT. THE SOMMERS DRUG STORES COMPANY. SAN ANTONIO AMR. J.
HAROLD DUNN. CHAIRMAN OF BOARD. THE SHAMROCK OIL S GAS COB.
PORATION. AMARILLO; MR. BEEMANFISHER. CHAIRMAN OF BOARD, TEXAS
ELECTRI C SERVICE CO., FORT WORTH: MR. BERL E. GODFREY. ATTORNEY.
MCGOWN. GODFREY, DECKER AND COURTNEY, FORT WORTH; MR. S. J.
HAY. CHAIRMAN OF BOARD. GREAT NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE CO.,
DALLAS: MR. RAY H. HORTON. HOUSTON: MR. E. S. JOSLIN, PRESIDENT.
CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY. CORPUS CHRISTI: MR. MAX LEVINE,
FOLEY'S, HOUSTON: MR. GROGAN LORD, PRESIDENT. TEXAS CAPITAL
CORPORATION. GEORGETOWN: MR. PARKER F. PROUTY, PRESIDENT &
GENERAL MANAGER. AVALANCHE.JOURNAL PUBLISHING CO.. LUBBOCK: MR.
TOM SEAL ATTORNEY. STUBBEMAN. MCRAE, SEALY P LAUGHLIN, MID.
LAND: MR. B. S. SINES. VICE PRESIDENT. SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY.
HOUSTON: MR. WALTER W. TROUT, PRESIDENT, LUFKIN FOUNDRY &
MACHINE COMPANY. LUFKIN: MR. BEN H. WOOTEN, CHAIRMAN OF BOARD.
DALLAS FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, DALLAS.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas Research League. Texas Research League Analyzes, October 1966, periodical, October 1966; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1427965/m1/2/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Rosenberg Library.