CORPUS CHRISTI, Tx — In public, an elected official promised Corpus Christi a drought solution with "ridiculously low" water rates. Behind closed doors, the city's water experts couldn't get straight answers about the most basic questions: How much would it cost? What's the quality of the water? When could it be delivered?
A two-hour recorded meeting at City Hall in August, obtained through a Texas Public Information Act request, captures the frustration of city officials trying to evaluate a groundwater desalination deal that could lock ratepayers into payments for decades.
The private discussion between Corpus Christi Water, South Texas Water Authority (STWA), and Seven Seas Water Group reveals a project full of uncertainty that contradicts public presentations.
"We're trying to do our due diligence to figure out what is the price of this water and we need help," Drew Molly, Corpus Christi Water's Chief Operating Officer, told the group. The city was weeks away from a council deadline, he noted, "talking about a project that we have no water quality data on. We don't know what the cost is, and we don't know what the schedule is."
The admission came after Kleberg County Judge Rudy Madrid stood before the city council in June promoting rates "not to exceed $5.50 per 1000 gallons" for what he called a regional drought solution.
Documents obtained by 6 Investigates and an interview with Seven Seas CEO Henry J. Charrabé reveal those numbers were quoted without completed studies, engineering, or even water quality tests.
"Why Would You Need to Know That?"
The August meeting began with a question from Assistant City Attorney Janet Whitehead: What did the water quality tests show?
Seven Seas Chief Commercial Officer Oliver Wiese's response set the tone: "No, we don't [have reports]. But I also have to say, why would you need to know that?"
When Whitehead explained that water quality directly impacts treatment requirements and costs, and that Seven Seas' own contract lists water testing as step one, the room grew tense. City Attorney Miles Risley intervened, "We've had a lot of water proposals pitched to us that aren't really viable. And what we know is if we buy into a water project that isn't really viable, we kill off a lot of other projects... We're out there chasing a dog that ain't gonna hunt."
This wasn't the transparency promised to taxpayers. Earlier, in a recorded community meeting also obtained by 6 Investigates, Seven Seas representatives said, "We don't have a study that even tells us we can do 30 million gallons per day... If they sign on, then we'll do the studies."
When asked about these statements in an interview with 6 Investigates, CEO Charrabé said, "The studies are being done. Full stop. Period."
But when those studies will be completed is unclear.
"We think we can deliver up to 30 MGD, but this needs to be confirmed, again, with the availability of brackish water in the aquifer," Charrabé said.
A Sole-Source Deal Without Competition
Unlike Corpus Christi's standard competitive bidding process, STWA's arrangement with Seven Seas was sole-sourced.
In the community meeting recording, Seven Seas representatives acknowledged they were essentially the only option STWA considered: "They had explored other options. Ours was the only one that gave them what they wanted, where we could take on all of the expenses."
This contrasts sharply with Seven Seas' deal in Alice, which Charrabé confirmed "went through an open RFP process" with an unredacted public contract. When asked why the STWA deal avoided competition, Charrabé said, "Ultimately, we are not the ones to decide whether this is an RFP with sole sources decision by the customer."
Drew Molly emphasized what the city loses without bidding, "We know that projects are usually better when you have to compete for the work. When there's competition, it brings out the best."
The Price That Isn't
During the August meeting, officials referenced water prices ranging from $3.50 to over $5.50 per thousand gallons.
6 Investigates obtained a summarized proposal from Seven Seas Water Group, which was provided to Corpus Christi Water in June.
According to that proposal, "STWA is offering the City of Corpus Christi a drought-proof and affordable water source by expanding its Brackish Water Treatment Plant, currently in development, with up to 30 MGD of water at $3.50 per kgal (plus minor surcharges)."
But, at that August meeting, neither South Texas Water Authority nor Seven Seas Water Group, could provide a cost for water, despite the proposal in June and Madrid's public statement promoting specific rates.
The confusion deepened when city staff pointed out that electricity costs — potentially substantial for desalination — were unknown "pass through" charges on top of whatever base rate emerged.
"Our ratepayer is gonna have a lot of questions if STWA is getting water for $3.50 and then we're paying $5.50, $6 per thousand gallons," Molly said. "That's going to be a pretty bad look for the City of Corpus Christi."
The contract obtained by 6 Investigates, heavily redacted with crucial financial terms blacked out, includes take-or-pay provisions requiring minimum purchases regardless of need. Seven Seas explicitly states it "is making a considerable financial investment in the capital cost of the Project and a financial return is required."
KRIS 6 News has protested this redacted contract and filed a response with the Texas Attorney General arguing why the unredacted contract should be public.
Decades of Payments, Zero Ownership
Perhaps most striking is what the city wouldn't get after decades of payments: ownership.
The contract confirms Seven Seas becomes "the only legal and beneficial owner of the property," but during the City Hall meeting, city officials were told STWA has an option to purchase the project for $1 after 30 years — an option that doesn't extend to Corpus Christi.
These details are redacted from the contract obtained by 6 Investigates.
The deal also includes two optional 15-year extensions, potentially stretching commitments to 60 years.
Molly used a pointed analogy: "We would be making payments every month to a landlord and at the end of the time period... we wouldn't own the apartment."
More questions
Another revelation from the August meeting: the 42-inch pipeline critical to delivering water hadn't yet been assessed. The evaluation could take as long as six to eight months, and without it, no one knows if the infrastructure can handle the promised flow.
While Judge Madrid publicly claimed the project would "discharge millions of fresh water a day into Baffin Bay" to "refresh the bay," the private meeting revealed discharge plans remain completely unsettled. Seven Seas is "looking hard at deep well injection" — pumping concentrated brine underground rather than into surface water and, as of that August meeting, the promised stakeholder group of environmental organizations hadn't materialized.
When asked about this discrepancy, Charrabé told 6 Investigates: "We as Seven Seas Water have never announced that we're gonna, you know, surface water discharge or discharge into the bay."
Near the meeting's end, an unidentified city staffer delivered this summary: "There is no cost. Everything that has been said to this point on August 1st, there is no engineering completed on the 30 MGD facility. There's no water quality to this point for a 30 MGD facility. There's no hydrology for a 30 MGD facility. There is no decision on the brine discharge for a 30 MGD facility. So, there is no information as of August 1st for this entire project."
John Marez with STWA responded: "You're absolutely right, and thank God the deadline's not August 1st."
The Transparency Breakdown
City officials were required to sign non-disclosure agreements just to review the contract. When the document was finally released to 6 Investigates through open records requests, it came heavily redacted.
"It's not something that makes me feel like we have information that should be out there for the public to see," Molly told 6 Investigates.
Charrabé defended this, "We want to make sure that obviously that's not gonna be used to our disadvantage." He said they were waiting for the Texas Attorney General to determine what must be made public.
The Bottom Line
As Corpus Christi faces critical water decisions, the city said the Seven Seas project represents both opportunity and risk. But the recordings and documents reveal those tasked with protecting ratepayer interests can't get answers to basic questions, even as pressure builds toward a September deadline.
"At the end of the day, if there's a problem with this product... our city council is not going to say Seven Seas has the problem. It's gonna say CCW does," Molly said during the meeting. "So it's in our best interest that we do the due diligence."
That due diligence remains incomplete. As Charrabé acknowledged when discussing expansion studies: "If that expanded study says the only thing you could do for 30, 40, 60 years is 20 million gallons... that's all of a sudden that's our new ceiling."
The city must now decide whether to commit generations of ratepayers to a deal where the most basic questions — cost, quality, timeline, capacity — remain unanswered, hidden behind NDAs and redactions, or promised only after the commitment is made.
READ MORE: Who controls the tap? Private water company seeks long-term deal in South Texas
READ MORE: Corpus Christi leaders question groundwater deal as critical studies remain incomplete
READ MORE: Residents voice opposition to proposed groundwater desalination facility in South Texas
