In This Issue: 

1. Stop the City Council From Paving Over the Dog’s Head
2. City Council Commits to Fossil Fuels Behind Closed Doors
3. Rain to River: A Better Vision for Austin’s Watersheds
4. Speak Up for Texas Water: Comment on the Draft 2027 State Water Plan

 
Stop the City Council From Paving Over the Dog’s Head
Speak Out Against Items 38, 39, and 60 on 5/21 Agenda

The proposed Dog’s Head Development Agreement (DA) affects 2,614 acres of land on the shores of one of the most pristine and biodiverse sections of the Colorado River, the free-flowing stretch renowned for its exceptional water quality and relatively limited urban development. Despite the ecological significance of this area, the City Manager has put forward an agreement that includes virtually no meaningful environmental protections, while offering the developer property and sales tax breaks.

This deal was negotiated behind closed doors, with no public input or oversight, bypassing review by the Planning Commission, Environmental Commission, or any other relevant board. The draft of the agreement was quietly posted late Friday afternoon, giving the public minimal time to review it ahead of a City Council vote scheduled for Thursday. If approved, the Development Agreement is irreversible and will govern development of the area for the next 45 years. Help demand these items be postponed and sent to the Boards and Commission for review! 

Here are some of the known problems:

1. No Development Limits: The agreement allows nearly unrestricted development—no limits on impervious cover, height, setbacks, or floor-to-area ratio. With minimal open space required and 100% impervious cover permitted on the remaining area, the agreement would permit 2,401 acres of pavement, worsening flooding, pollution, and heat island effects.
2. Floodplain and Water Quality Risks: Unlimited floodplain modifications are allowed, and the Critical Water Quality Zone (CWQZ) for the Colorado River is reduced to 200 feet, permitting development like roads and golf cart trails within the CWQZ. This increases erosion, disrupts water flow, and removes vegetation that protects against flooding and pollution.
3. No Cut-and-Fill Limits: This agreement would exempt the property from cut-and-fill regulations that are intended to limit changes to natural topography to control erosion and flooding.
4. Code Variances Without Oversight: The Director of Development Services, in his sole discretion, would be given authority to approve any variances to any city regulations (environmental, transportation, parkland) without public hearings or City Council votes.
5. Risky Water Quality Ponds: Old mining ponds will be used for water quality treatment, which could introduce legacy pollutants without proper oversight.
6. Developer Control for 45 Years: The developer has veto power over City Council decisions affecting the property for 45 years. The agreement can only be amended with the developer’s consent, but they can terminate it unilaterally if tax breaks aren’t granted.
7. Broad Zoning Uses: Almost all zoning uses are allowed, including industrial manufacturing, car dealerships, marinas, and outdoor entertainment venues. Large-scale tech uses like data centers? It’s possible.
8. Environmental Injustice: The project worsens environmental injustices in nearby neighborhoods, offering little benefit while increasing harm, despite using public tax dollars for infrastructure.
9. Tax Breaks for Developers: The city must create a tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ), diverting property and sales tax revenue from public services to fund the developer’s infrastructure. The area is misleadingly labeled “blighted” so the developers can qualify for these tax breaks.

TAKE ACTION TODAY

Email City Council (or sign up to speak HERE) and demand that the City Council POSTPONE Items 38, 39, and 60, send them through the boards and commissions process, especially the Environmental Commission. If this were truly a good deal for Austin, it can withhold public review.

20260521-038, Agenda Backup: Draft Agreement, PDF, 1.2 MB, posted 5/15/2026
20260521-038, Agenda Backup: Exhibits, PDF, 7.7 MB, posted 5/15/2026
20260521-038, Agenda Backup: Recommendation for Action, PDF, 121 KB, posted 5/15/2026

This item must be postponed immediately and sent through the Environmental Commission and full public review process before Council takes any action. Please spread the word, and speak out before Thursday’s vote.

 
Austin’s Rain to River Plan Adoption Provides Sharp Contrast to Dog’s Head Paving PlanItem 45 on the Austin City Council’s Thursday agenda calls for adoption of the City Watershed Protection Department’s Rain to River Strategic Plan.  SOS wholeheartedly supports the Rain to River plan.  We hope the City Council will not only vote to adopt it but use it and follow it. If it did, Endeavor’s Dog’s Head deal would not be on the table. The cognitive dissonance could scarcely be greater. 

Here’s one key part of the Watershed Department’s plan:
“What We Will Do: We’re committed to making our environmental and drainage standards clear, consistent, and enforceable. By improving how we work together and share expectations, we will reduce uncertainty while holding projects accountable for meeting watershed protection goals. This work prioritizes transparency and responsibility so that development supports the health, safety, and resilience of our community.”
Imagine a world where the City Council actually followed through on these same commitments. Alas, the Council’s moral and environmental compass is either lost, broken, sold, or discarded. And yet, here it is!! Hiding in plain sight.

Thank you to all of the Watershed Protection staff and community members who put such hard, thoughtful work into this process.

 
City Council Commits to Fossil Fuels Behind Closed DoorsFor Item 7 on the 5/21 Council Meeting, Austin Energy will be attempting to get the City Council to vote on potentially a billion-dollars worth of investment in natural gas peakers, behind closed doors, in Executive Session. Our friends at Public Citizen and other environmental organizations are speaking out, and we wanted to make sure to share the information. 

In an obvious attempt to bypass transparency and public oversight on a decision that would result in a de facto abandonment of the City’s carbon-free by 2035 goal, this closed-door meeting allows the City and Austin Energy to negotiate directly with unnamed companies for unspecified quantities of gas turbines, without going through a competitive purchasing process. 

Under the Energy Resource, Generation, and Climate Protection Plan to 2035 (2035 Plan), Austin Energy is required to issue an RFP to openly evaluate all available power generation, including renewable energy and battery storage. Importantly, Austin Energy must test whether carbon-free sources can meet the same reliability needs before pursuing gas peakers. Yet, without publishing the results of the RFP or any of the alternative generation analysis, Austin Energy now seeks Council approval for closed-door negotiations to pursue natural gas peakers. This abrupt reversal of requiring a transparent and competitive process by Austin Energy undermines the cornerstone of the 2035 Plan: “Community collaboration fosters transparency.” 

What is at stake is Austin’s climate future. Natural gas peakers (even new and more efficient models) are an environmentally harmful solution, as they perpetuate reliance on fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane, contributing to climate change. Adding more peakers to the grid will only result in more emissions. And because natural gas peakers typically operate during periods of high demand, their emissions align with times of peak air pollution, exacerbating environmental and public health issues. 
Tell City Council and Austin Energy to follow the 2035 Plan and focus on carbon-free options already available instead of rushing into buying gas peakers without giving the clean energy path an opportunity to succeed. 

TAKE ACTION
Speak at City Council this Thursday, May 21stWhere: Austin City Hall, 301 W. 2nd Street, Council Chambers
When: Meeting begins at 10:00 AM; AGAINST Agenda Item 7 (Regular Meeting) (Sign up to speak online HERE before noon on Wednesday or at City Hall before 8 am on Thursday).   

Sign Up to Speak at Council
 
Help Shape the Future of Texas WaterTexas Water Development Board Is Planning for Massive Groundwater ExpansionThe Draft 2027 State Water Plan lays out a future shaped by massive groundwater pumping, new pipelines, desalination plants, aquifer storage schemes, and explosive demand from sprawling development and data centers. State officials are projecting nearly $174 billion in future water infrastructure needs, and rural Texas aquifers are squarely in the crosshairs.

The Texas Water Development Board is accepting public comment right now, and this may be one of the few opportunities ordinary Texans have to get concerns on the record before these projects move from paper to reality.

If you care about your well, our creeks, our springs, our wildlife, or the future of water in Texas, now is the time to speak while it can still make a difference.

Bring Your Voice to the Water BoardAttend the public hearing on May 27, submit comments before May 29, and tell state officials that Texas water is not an unlimited commodity to be pumped, piped, and sold off without consequence. The people driving these projects are counting on silence, fatigue, and the assumption that nobody is paying attention. Let’s show them we are paying attention. 

Public Hearing on the Draft 2027 State Water Plan
May 27, 2026, 1:00 PM
Stephen F Austin Bldg, 1700 N Congress Ave or virtually via Teams Meeting (Meeting ID: 280 904 566 316 4; Passcode: fp9Lk2bs. Audio access only: 512-298-6360; phone conference ID: 508 590 523#)
Written comments accepted through May 29, 2026

Make Your Voice Heard 
 
There's rumbles of big storms gathering across Central Texas, with forecasts showing anywhere from 2-6 inches of rain over the next week. After years of drought, heat, and watching our springs struggle, we  welcome it. Let’s hope it comes in sheets, sinks deep into the ground, fills our creeks, and cools the soil and trees.

And while the skies open up, we need people to show up too.

This week’s City Council agenda contains decisions with consequences that would last generations. If you can attend, speak, write Council, or help spread the word, now is the time. Public pressure and presence matters, and we've seen it make a difference time and again. 

In Solidarity,
SOS Alliance

More than 8,000 public comments slammed into CTRMA’s MoPac South expansion scheme before the May 3rd deadline, the largest response we’ve ever seen for a single public comment period for this project. 
​
Thank you to every single person who took the time to speak up for Barton Springs, the Edwards Aquifer, our parks, wildlife, neighborhoods, and Austin’s future. The message was loud and clear: Austinites are tired of billion-dollar highway boondoggles masquerading as transportation solutions while our water, trees, and public lands are put on the chopping block.

This fight is far from over.
Now CTRMA has to publicly post -- and respond to -- every single comment submitted. Their staff will eventually make a recommendation on how to proceed, likely sometime in fall 2026. Between now and then, we intend to keep the pressure on with a second wave of advocacy, continued oversight, organizing, and public scrutiny.

We are incredibly grateful to the powerhouse team of scientists, engineers, biologists, arborists, and transportation experts who helped dismantle the deeply flawed Draft Environmental Assessment piece by piece:
​

• WATER QUALITY REPORT by Dr. Lauren Ross, civil and environmental engineer with Glenrose Engineering, exposed major failures in the project’s water quality analysis, including inadequate treatment assumptions and the near-total dismissal of highway-related pollutants including heavy metals, tire dust, and microplastics washing directly into our waterways. She also notes that 272.93 acres associated with the proposed highway expansion receive no water quality treatment prior to discharge; including large areas that drain into Barton and Eanes Creek watersheds. More than 44% of the highway runoff area within these sensitive areas receive no treatment, draining into karst landscapes that flow directly into the aquifer, Barton Springs, and Cold Springs, allowing highway contaminants to directly enter and degrade these sensitive features. 
• TREE CANOPY REPORT by Sydney Dwoskin, a certified arborist, documented the staggering ecological cost of removing up-to a massive 70 acre swath of urban canopy, including heritage trees and sensitive parkland vegetation already stressed by drought and climate change. The loss of this canopy would cause irreparable harm to ecosystems while exacerbating urban heat island effects. 
• AIR QUALITY REPORT by Dr. John Zamurs, transportation and air quality expert at Zamurs and Associates, exposed traffic modeling built on stale assumptions, inflated projections, and magical thinking about congestion relief. He explains how the highway expansion will expose residents and students at Austin High School to higher concentrations of air pollutants. Yet, there is no analysis of the environmental health risks of PM2.5, PM10, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), or ozone. His analysis also laid bare the project’s failure to seriously consider transit, climate impacts, or induced demand in the Environmental Assessment.
• TRAFFIC MODELING by Norm Marshall, President of Smart Mobility and one of the country’s leading transportation planners, showed how the traffic analysis was rigged from the start to justify widening MoPac no matter what the actual data says. His work cuts straight through the smoke and mirrors. He points out that the data used to initially dismiss alternatives is from 2012, and now travel time savings estimated for selected alternatives are significantly less than what was previously assumed (only 5-6 minutes, during rush hour, if you travel all 8 miles).
• HYDROLOGY and CAVE REPORT by Dr. Nico Hauwert, pioneering hydrogeologist and one of Central Texas’ foremost experts on karst systems and dye tracing, detailed the enormous risks to the Edwards Aquifer, caves, recharge features, and groundwater flow systems that make Barton Springs possible in the first place. The expansion would increase impervious surfaces, leading to greater runoff of pollutants such as heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, and sediment into the aquifer.
• SALAMANDER REPORT by Crystal Datri, conservation biologist and salamander expert, documented the serious threats posed to endangered salamanders that live within these fragile underground ecosystems. The EA very much downplays these federally protected species. She emphasizes that the Draft EA fails to propose sufficient mitigation measures that relate to the actual taking of the species, making its conclusion of "No Significant Impacts" scientifically indefensible.

Together, these reports paint the real and devastating picture that this project threatens some of our favorite natural areas in Austin, including Barton Springs. If continued as planned, it would risk endangered species habitat, along with air quality, public health, and Austin’s climate goals, all while relying on outdated traffic data and a deeply biased review process designed to avoid a full Environmental Impact Statement.

What about the TPIA lawsuit? 
Our Texas Public Information Act lawsuit is already producing results. CTRMA is now cooperating and has stated they intend to provide the records and attachments we requested. We are waiting for them to fully come through on that commitment, and we expect another update within the next week.

Transparency matters. Especially when billions of bond dollars and irreplaceable environmental resources are on the line.

Help SOS Keep the Pressure On
Your donation helps pay for independent science, legal action, expert review, public education, records requests, and the relentless watchdog work needed to protect Barton Springs, the Edwards Aquifer, Zilker Park, and Austin’s future from a disastrous highway expansion project that should never have made it this far. Please chip in today and help us fund the next phase of this fight.

If approved, it would turn Darden Hill Rd. into a segment in the broader “Dripping Springs Bypass,” diverting US 290 highway traffic from RM 1826 to the western side of Dripping Springs and paving the way for increased development in extremely environmentally sensitive areas. ​

Local opposition is growing. Nearly 500 residents have already signed a petition organized by the group at savedardenhill.com, voicing concerns about safety, noise, and environmental impacts. If you want to learn more or make your voice heard, there’s an important meeting on May 20th at 6pm, Twisted X Brewing (23455 W RR 150, Dripping Springs, TX) hosted by County Judge Ruben Becerra, who is stepping in to help address community concerns. ​

Thank you for staying engaged with our current work, from highways to data center industry to purple pipes and back again. We know it’s a lot, and we appreciate you taking the time to be in it with us. Meanwhile, the spring weather is spring-ing, and we hope you’re finding time outside; on the greenbelt, at the springs, or doing cartwheels into your favorite patch of wildflowers.

We’re glad you’re here.

In Solidarity,
SOS Alliance

In This Story…

• Reclaimed water is wastewater treated to a high standard and reused for both potable and non-potable purposes.  Some states and cities have made tremendous efforts to use this resource. 

• Nevada, Arizona, and Florida reclaim at least 50% of their wastewater.  San Antonio reclaims 17% of its wastewater.  The El Paso water utility is building the first direct wastewater-to-tap water treatment plant in the country.

• Austin, which considers itself a leader in water conservation, reclaimed less than 7% of its water in 2023.  If all of Austin’s remaining wastewater in 2023 were reclaimed to drinking water standards, it would provide for 764,000 more people.

A recently published story on water supply in Central Texas explained that acute water shortages could afflict our region in as little as 15 years.  New approaches to protecting water supplies are no longer a luxury. They are a prerequisite.

In addition to demand-side conservation and replacing old water pipes, another valuable strategy is reclaimed water.

In several states in the U.S., it is quite common to treat large percentages of wastewater as a resource.  In the arid state of Nevada, 85% of its wastewater is reclaimed.  In Florida, it is 55%.  Significant percentages of wastewater are also reclaimed in: Arizona, 52%; California, 22%; and New Mexico, 18%.  

Often the water is used directly in a dedicated reclaimed water utility constructed with purple pipe, so that it is not mistaken for potable water (drinking-water) pipes.  Reclaimed water is used for landscape irrigation, cooling towers for air conditioning in large buildings and electric power plants, industrial manufacturing, and toilet flushing.  

Other times, water is upgraded to an even higher standard, and used to replenish reservoirs and aquifers.  It is also used for crop irrigation.  And a trend is beginning to use advanced water treatment technology to upgrade wastewater directly into potable water, with some of the first plants of this kind in the U.S. being built in water-scarce regions of Texas.

The Texas Leaders
Though Texas only recycles about 4% of its wastewater, the state is planning to obtain 14% of its new water supplies from reclaimed water by 2070.

Some Texas cities have emerged as national leaders in reclaimed water use.  

• Big Spring – The spring for which this West Texas city was christened was never big by modern standards.  Even when it was a watering hole for Comanche and Apache Indians, its average daily flow would have only satisfied about 500 Austin-sized homes in 2023.  Due to growth from settlers and railroads, the spring went dry in the mid-1920s.  

This parched city’s water utility built a plant converting its treated and chlorinated sewage to drinking water via microfiltration, reverse osmosis, and ultraviolet-light/hydrogen peroxide disinfection.  When commissioned in 2013, the plant was the first of its kind in the U.S., and provided 40% of the city’s water supply.

The utility typically mixes this water with a different raw water source to reduce the stigma associated with direct use of sewage.  However, it provided undiluted water directly to consumers during a drought in 2014-2015. 

• El Paso – El Paso has three different kinds of reclaimed water production.  

1. Beginning in 1963, its purple pipe utility provided non-potable water for landscapes, cooling towers, street sweeping, fire protection, building construction, and industrial processes.  The system reused about 8% of its 2023 wastewater production.

2. Since 1985, wastewater upgraded to drinking water standards has been used to help recharge the Hueco Wells Aquifer, which provides 38% of the city’s total water supply.  

3. In 2025, the city began construction of the 10 million gallon per day Pure Water Center that will purify wastewater to drinking water, which will go online in 2028.  Its four-step process includes reverse osmosis, followed by an ultraviolet light/hydrogen peroxide disinfection process, followed by carbon-filtration, and finally completed with chlorination.

Unlike the Big Spring plant, it is intended for direct use without dilution from other water sources (another first in the U.S.), and it will process six times as much water.

• Wichita Falls – Since 2017, this city on the Oklahoma border has directed highly treated wastewater to Lake Arrowhead 17 miles away.  The mixture of raw and reclaimed water is then retreated to potable standards.

• San Antonio – San Antonio’s water utility began its reclaimed water system in 1999.  It provides non-potable water to commercial buildings, industries, and CPS Energy power plants for cooling.  In 2024, about 5% of its wastewater was used by individual customers, and 12% was used for power production.

The Austin Experience
To date, Austin Water has not invested as much attention and money in reclaimed water as other utilities with higher-achieving systems.

Austin began using reclaimed water in 1974, when it began to irrigate a golf course with it.  It was also sold as cooling water to Austin Energy’s Sandhill Power Plant in Southeast Austin.  

Austin’s reclaimed water line mileage has doubled between 2011 and 2023, when the system reached about 70 miles in length.  (This compares to the drinking water system over 3,900 miles long.)  If not reclaimed, this treated wastewater would otherwise flow back to the Colorado River.  

In 2023, about 3.3% of Austin’s wastewater was reclaimed for uses including cooling towers for Austin’s district chilling system, landscaping, and non-potable uses at the Mueller Airport redevelopment and Austin’s Bergstrom Airport.  Another 3.3% was used in the wastewater treatment process.

If all of the remaining wastewater in Austin could be treated to a high-quality standard and reused, it would supply the needs of an additional 764,000 people at Austin’s 2023 per capita level of consumption.  This would be equivalent to 67% of the population in Austin Water’s service territory in that year.

If you believe Austin should expand reclaimed water use as a central water supply strategy, write in and let local water policymakers know this matters today. Use the form letter link below to contact the Water and Wastewater Commission and the Water Forward Task Force to encourage smarter, more responsible water management. 

This Thursday, May 7th, the Austin City Council will vote on Item 24, a resolution that opens the door to economic incentives for data centers and the artificial intelligence industry. We need you at City Hall!

The resolution establishes a “new economic development framework” that names “Data Management & Artificial Intelligence” as one of the ten Target Economic Sectors in Exhibit A, which calls it an “explosive growth sector: three of Austin's four largest-ever venture funding rounds closed in 2025; enterprise AI and data infrastructure.”
If Council passes Item 24 on Thursday, here is what it actually does:

• Puts tax rebates on the table. Data centers would become eligible for Chapter 380 performance grants, where Austin’s taxpayer dollars would be used to incentivize data centers and AI-backed companies to move here!
• Turns on a fast lane for permits, immediately. The resolution from the Council directs the City Manager to activate a “permitting concierge service” for any target-sector project already in the development pipeline.
• Pre-clears land. The City would identify “ready sites” in advance to enable rapid recruitment of data centers and AI-backed companies. 

Austin's Environmental Commission Asked for the Opposite
On April 1, 2026, Austin's Environmental Commission voted 10-0 to adopt Recommendation 20260401-004, urging the City Council to take a coordinated, protective approach to data center development in Central Texas. Among other things, the Commission asked Council to:

• Prohibit tax breaks and financial incentives for data centers locating in Austin;
• Invoke a moratorium on all new data centers in the City Limits and the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, in alignment with bipartisan national calls;
• Publish the report on "projected environmental impact and resource usage of local data centers over the next ten years" that Council itself directed the City Manager to produce in April 2025;
• Require Tier II and higher data centers to generate at least 50% of their electricity onsite from renewable sources;
• Require Data centers to use reclaimed water and direct investment in the City's purple pipe program via a water mitigation fund;
• Require operational curtailment during declared electrical emergencies;
• Mandate Council approval for large-load extension requests;
• Define "data center" in City Code;
• Require public notice to property owners within one mile of any data center construction site.
  

Item 24 does none of this. It moves in the opposite direction.
This resolution will pave the way for tax breaks and other incentives for data centers that drink hundreds of thousands of gallons of water a day and pull as much electricity as small cities. This Thursday, we need you at City Hall. Speak for the springs, the grid, and the water.

Here's How to Show Up!
1. Speak at City Council on Thursday, May 7
Where: Austin City Hall, 301 W. 2nd Street, Council Chambers
When: Meeting begins at 10:00 AM; AGAINST Agenda Item #24 (Regular Meeting) (Sign up to speak online before noon on Wednesday or at City Hall before 8 am on Thursday).  Speaker Form Here.  
2. Spread the Word - Send this email to your friends and neighbors that care about Austin’s water and are concerned about the proliferation of data centers locally

Speak Up for Our Historic Barton Springs Bridge at Austin Environmental Commission Tomorrow
The Austin Environmental Commission will hear a briefing on the proposed demolition and replacement of our historic Barton Springs Bridge tomorrow, Wednesday, evening at 6:00 P.M, at the City's Permitting and Development Center, Room 1405, 6310 WILHELMINA DELCO DRIVE.

To register to speak remotely (on Item 2), sign up before noon today by contacting Nicole Corona (512-974-3146), Nicole.Corona@austintexas.gov. You may sign up to speak in person at the meeting, before it starts. City staff and contractors continue to say the bridge cannot be repaired, but their own reports show the bridge can be saved for tens of millions of dollars less than tearing it down and replacing it with a giant highway bridge that, if built, will pave Zilker Park land and tear up Barton Creek and riparian habitats. Go to Austin Free Press here for the overview.  

The Commission will also discuss, and hear comments, on the proposed 6 to 8 lane expansion of MoPac South. That is Agenda Item 4.

A Massive Outcry Against Proposed MoPac Expansion -- THANK YOU!
​
​The Austin community flipped the script for the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, who claims that its 8.77-mile expansion, with an additional 6-8 lanes over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, will have “no significant impact” on Austin’s environment. More than 6,000 comments were filed through the Better Mopac Coalition advocacy page, with thousands more submitted directly to CTRMA. The home stretch brought a massive wave of support and joyful resistance. On Sunday, nearly a hundred people gathered at Barton Springs Pool with songs and education led by Singing Resistance Austin, Jade Fusco, Mary Olivar, Matt Dietrichson, and others. It was a strong, spirited close to a 75-day sprint of collective action, grounded in shared purpose and place.

What’s Next?
While the official public comment on CTRMA's draft Environmental Assessment closed at midnight Sunday, the CTRMA Board of Directors will not decide on its next steps until after its staff has prepared responses to public comments and made a recommendation. That will likely be in late summer or this fall. Between now and then, please stay engaged with us and the Better MoPac Coalition and watch for opportunities to speak up.
In the short term, we will share expert reports and summary comments from SOS and the Better MoPac Coalition. More updates to come as the process moves forward. Stay tuned!

In Solidarity and Gratitude, 
SOS Alliance 

Submit Your Comments by May 3 and Spread the Word
The public comment clock on the MoPac South Draft Environmental Assessment is ticking down. If you haven’t submitted your comment, now is the time.

We will be adding more technical and legal comments before the Sunday at midnight deadline, but we need you -- all of our friends and supporters -- to write your comments and hit "send." The voice of the community matters here. Make it personal and urge them to recognize the impacts will be many and significant if they go forward with the proposed project. Ask for a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and less harmful alternatives. Austin City Council, Travis County Commissioners Court, and the Urban Transportation Commission agree.

Save Our Springs Alliance has filed a lawsuit against CTRMA for refusing to release public comments and violating the Texas Public Information Act by withholding as “confidential” public comments filed in the Agency’s official public comment process. You can find the lawsuit here. While that legal process moves forward, your comment matters even more.

Take Action
You can submit more than one comment! The period ends this SUNDAY, MAY 3rd at Midnight. 

• Better MoPac Comment Form Since CTRMA is not making comments easily accessible, we recommend using the Better MoPac Coalition form which emails the board and creates a record. You can also submit directly by email, mail, or voicemail (3 minutes).
• CTRMA Comment Form
• Email: mopacsouth@ctrma.org
• Mail: Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, ATTN: MoPac South, 3300 N. IH-35, Suite 300, Austin, TX 78705
• Voicemail (3 minutes max): 512-387-5811

Spread the word: It's crazy how many people still don’t know about this expansion. Please sing this from the rooftops. Share that every voice helps build the public record of residents, organizations, businesses, and anyone who loves Austin opposing this terrible plan. 

Data Centers Update: Disappointment and Progress

Amongst protecting the water quality of our creeks and aquifers from roads and developers, SOS is also working hard to encourage cities and counties to act to protect our local water supplies from overuse. Data centers, as you are likely aware, are among the worst water wasters. Depending on the size of the facility and the cooling technology it uses, a single data center’s annual water use can rival that of entire neighborhoods or small towns.
There are two actions that occurred last week that we want to highlight.

Guadalupe County. Last Tuesday, on a split 3-2 vote, the Guadalupe County Commissioners Court voted to approve a tax abatement and a development agreement for the Cloudburst Data Center, near the Hays County border. This is one of the larger data centers planned in our drought-prone region. How much water will Cloudburst use for cooling and its planned gas power plant? They won’t say. 

• SOS and nearby residents have filed multiple public information requests to find out what Cloudburst is telling government agencies. Each time, the company has fought to heavily redact its projected water demands (pages so blacked out they look like they belong in the Epstein files) claiming it’s a matter of national security.
• Despite the lack of transparency and despite hours of testimony of concerned residents encouraging the Commissioners’ Court to reject the massive tax breaks and the development agreement that offered nothing more than a guarantee for a 100-ft. setback from the road, the Commissioners ignored their constituents and voted for both items.
• While we deeply appreciate the two commissioners who voted against this agreement (Jackie Ott and Stephen Germann), the overall decision is a setback for environmental protection, transparency, and public health in Guadalupe County.

San Marcos, Texas. We’re getting there in San Marcos. That same Tuesday, the SMtx City Council considered amendments to its land development code. Several of the amendments pertained to data centers.

• A complete ban on data centers failed on a 3-4 vote (thank you to Amanda Rodriguez, Alyssa Garza, and Shane Scott for voting yes), there were several other amendments approved that are heading in the right direction. This includes a ban on potable water use (i.e, drinking water) for cooling towers (Yay! Every city needs to do this).
• The Council also limited data centers to the highest industrial zoning category, while also making them conditional to ensure that each data center must be approved individually by the City Council. Council Member Rodriguez largely led the charge, but many of the others (even some members who voted against the ban) also suggested provisions to strengthen the code against data centers’ impacts on our water, air, and community. Organizers are hoping that another member will reconsider their vote on 2nd reading and support the ban on data centers.

Community Voices Ring Out at MoPac Town Hall
Last week's MoPac Town Hall, hosted by Save Our Springs Alliance and the Better MoPac Coalition, was a tremendous success. THANK YOU! Hundreds of students, parents, environmentalists, and concerned residents packed the Austin High School cafeteria to speak out against this destructive highway expansion and to call foul on CTRMA's proposed FONSI.
And for good reason. This expansion will:

• Pave over 110 acres of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, threatening groundwater quality, our creeks and Barton Springs;
• Harm 4 federally endangered species and their habitats, including the Barton Springs Salamander and Austin Blind Salamander;
• Carve through some of Austin's most iconic parkland and recreational spaces, including Zilker Park, the Barton Creek Greenbelt, and the Lady Bird Lake Hike and Bike Trail; and

Pollute our air with massive increases in cars (increasing annual vehicle miles traveled on MoPac by a whopping 331 million) with more car emissions directly next to neighborhoods and Austin High School (If you didn’t see it, Austin’s air quality just received a failing grade from the American Lung Association).
It’s time to demand better. The community is tired of watching CTRMA and TxDOT sacrifice our environment, public health, and quality of life for highway expansions that don’t solve congestion.

Two Critical Actions You Can Take This Week
1. Attend the CTRMA Board Meeting – Wednesday, April 29th at 9am
This is our chance to speak directly to the decision-makers. Show up on Wednesday morning at 9am and tell the CTRMA Board to:

• Reject the FONSI
• Proceed with a full Environmental Impact Statement

You’ll need to sign in before 9am to be able to speak. 3300 N. IH 35, Suite 300, Austin, TX 78705.
​
2. Submit Your Comments by May 3rd -- and Spread the Word!
The deadline for public comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment is this Saturday, May 3rd. This is one of the most important ways you can make your voice heard. You can submit more than one comment—and please share this widely: socials, workplaces, family, friends, and your communities (running groups, paddling crews, trail runners, water lovers). A huge number of people still haven’t heard anything about this highway expansion, and the only support we’re seeing for proposed plan is coming from those who stand to profit from it.

What to Include in Your Comments:
Demand a Full EIS: CTRMA is cutting corners with a predetermined FONSI. Under the National Environmental Policy Act, a full EIS is required when a project will significantly impact the environment. Drilling into the Edwards Aquifer, harming endangered species, damaging parks, and worsening air quality next to Austin High School are all significant impacts that should trigger a full EIS.

Question the Outdated Analysis: This project started in 2011, and the traffic model used to dismiss alternatives was finalized in 2012—over 14 years ago. Since then, we've had a pandemic, expanded telecommuting, and approved Project Connect. We need CTRMA to rethink this project with reconsideration of alternatives, updated data, and consideration of local goals and policies.

Challenge the "Benefits": After 5-7 years of disruptive construction, the project will save only 5-6 minutes for someone traveling the entire 8.77-mile length during rush hour.  Meanwhile, construction delays will largely zero out these minimal improvements.

Protect Endangered Species: CTRMA admits the expansion will adversely affect 4 federally endangered species but refuses to consider design alternatives that could avoid these impacts. Construction will threaten the clean flow of groundwater to Barton Springs and kill cave ecosystems that cannot be restored.

Demand Clean Air for Students: Austin High School students and nearby residents will be exposed to higher levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) from increased traffic, tire wear, and brake dust. CTRMA's claim that air quality will improve despite 331 million more vehicle miles traveled per year being added to the corridor is not credible.

Protect Our Water: The proposed water quality treatment doesn't meet the standards that Travis County and the City of Austin use for their own roads. During construction, sediment and pollutants will flow directly into the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, causing irreversible harm.

How to Submit Comments:
Easiest option: Use the Better MoPac Coalition's custom form at bettermopaccoalition.org.
Email: mopacsouth@ctrma.org
Mail: Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, ATTN: MoPac South, 3300 N. IH-35, Suite 300, Austin, TX 78705
Voicemail (3 minutes max): 512-387-5811
Tips for Effective Comments:

1. Use your own voice. CTRMA must respond to every comment, so personalizing your message ensures your specific concerns get addressed 
2. Talk about significant impacts to your community. What will this mean for your neighborhood, your family, your commute, your daily life?
3. You don't need to be a scientist. Your experience and common sense matter.
4. Share widely. Encourage friends and neighbors to submit comments too.

The Bottom Line
Every city has traffic problems, but there's only one Barton Springs. No other City in the world has such a unique, spring-fed pool minutes from downtown.
We don't have to accept CTRMA's false choice between destructive highway expansion and doing nothing. We can demand better solutions that protect our environment, keep our air and water clean, and invest in modern, sustainable alternatives like transit and demand management. We can also pursue small tweaks to fix bottlenecks to get traffic moving at a fraction of the cost, without construction delays, using existing pavement.
The momentum is building. Let's finish what we started.
​
Submit your comments by May 3rd, and we'll see you at the CTRMA Board meeting on April 29th.
For more information, maps, and resources, visit bettermopaccoalition.org

In Solidarity,
Save Our Springs Alliance & Better MoPac Coalition

MoPac South Town Hall: Learn. Discuss. Take Action. ​
Austin faces a defining moment, and we're ready to meet it head on. CTRMA’s draft Environmental Assessment is full of holes and downplays real damage this expansion would cause to our aquifer, the unique ecosystems above and below ground, and our communities.

Join your neighbors, transportation and environmental experts, and leaders from Austin ISD, Travis County, and local conservation groups on Earth Day, Wednesday April 22nd from 6-8 PM at the Austin High School cafeteria, the campus that would be hit the hardest by this disaster plan. Come ask tough questions, share your perspective, and submit official comments before the upcoming May 3rd deadline. We’ll provide pizza, beverages, and childcare, so that all ages (and parents) can participate.

What’s at stake? 7-9 new lanes along 8.8 miles of MoPac—from Enfield Road to Slaughter Lane—directly over Lady Bird Lake, Zilker Park, the Butler Trail bridge, Barton Springs, and Austin High School. This project won’t fix traffic; it will make it worse, while increasing water, air, noise, and light pollution along the corridor.

Show up and help shape the future of MoPac and protect Austin’s water, parks, schools, neighborhoods, and public health. 

Help Save Austin’s Historic Barton Springs Bridge

Speaking of taking matters into our own hands, here’s one that’s been building for a while. The Barton Springs Bridge, built in 1926 and expanded in 1946, is a centerpiece of Zilker Park and part of the National Register Historic District. But the City is planning to tear it down and replace it with a massive highway-style bridge, nearly twice as wide, at a cost of $54.5 million, while destroying parkland, harming Barton Creek, and disrupting access for years.

The good news? The City’s own experts have confirmed that the bridge can be restored and upgraded for bike and pedestrian access at a fraction of the cost. Austin has a history of saving its iconic bridges. In 1997, the Lamar Bridge (much like Barton Springs Bridge) was threatened with sudden demolition. The community stepped in, and instead of tearing it down, Austin preserved the bridge and built the Pfluger Pedestrian Bridge alongside it, improving bike and pedestrian access without sacrificing history.

Now, we can do the same with Barton Springs Bridge, protecting our iconic architecture and Barton Creek while creating safer, smarter connections for everyone. The Barton Springs Bridge will most likely be on the agenda of the next meeting of the Historic Landmark Commission at City Hall on Wednesday, May 6 at 6 PM. Please plan to join us if you can—and help spread the word to others!
​

In the interim, we’ve prepared a letter to the Mayor, Austin City Council, Austin Historic Landmark Commissioners, Austin Parks Board, and Austin Environmental Commission members, asking them to halt demolition and pursue restoration.
You can join the cause! Add your name to the letter and help show city leaders that Austin stands for historic preservation, smart growth, and protecting our parks and waterways.

The plan sets a target for carbon-free energy by 2035; however, Austin Energy continues to evaluate the addition of new fossil fuel generation, including methane gas-fired peaker plant which would increase greenhouse gas emissions and local air pollution. The alternative is to continue investing in local batteries and solar, as well as energy efficiency and demand response. Please come out to one or more of the meetings and speak up for the clean energy path. And bring a friend!
​

• Wed, April 15 | 6–8 PM – Montopolis Recreation & Community Center
• Thu, April 16 | 6–8 PM – Concordia University
• Tue, April 21 | 6–8 PM – Decker Middle School

Every day is Earth Day, but in April we go all out! Come see SOS at these awesome events over the next few weeks. Learn about our work, meet like-minded folks, and find ways to protect our waters, parks, and wild spaces.
​
 Earth Day ATX 2026: “A Moment for Us”
When: RESCHEDULED May 2nd, 12 PM-5 PM
Where: Huston-Tillotson University (900 Chicon St, Austin, TX 78702)
What: Join one of Central Texas’s longest-running sustainability celebrations at HTU. Explore engaging exhibits, hands-on activities, and interactive programming that connect you to the environment and the local green community. Meet fellow attendees passionate about environmental stewardship and discover practical ways to make a difference in your everyday life.

Meadows Center Earth Day Festival
When: Saturday, April 18, 10 AM-4 PM
Where: Spring Lake (201 San Marcos Springs Drive, San Marcos, Texas)
What: Celebrate the 13th Annual Earth Day San Marcos Festival with family and friends at the headwaters of the San Marcos River. Enjoy live performances, demonstrations, and hands-on activities while connecting with local eco-focused organizations and vendors. This year’s theme, One Heart, Many Waters, highlights our community’s deep connection to water and the ecosystems that give us life.

UT Austin Earth Day Fair
When: Wednesday, April 22, 2 PM – 5 PM
Where: Gregory Plaza, UT Austin (2101 Speedway, Austin, TX 78712)
What: Earth Day is a movement to protect our planet and inspire new practices. Stop by the Hooked on Earth Day Fair to explore sustainability initiatives, green innovations, and ways to support a healthier campus and community. Connect with student organizations, programs, and local sustainability leaders, sip on solar-powered smoothies, and learn how small actions can make a big difference.
 
It’s a busy month! But don’t let the MoPac South expansion move forward without your voice. Join us at the MoPac South Town Hall on April 22, come ready with your hard questions, and tell everyone you know who love the caves, the water, the trails, and the Lake—this plan hits so much of what we love about Austin.
Sign up, show up, and speak up. We appreciate you! 
​
In Solidarity, 
SOS Alliance