San Antonio, Texas, the seventh largest city in the United States, has experienced steady population growth, since the ''boom'' of the 1960s. Projected water shortages due to this growth were realized as early as the 1970s by city leaders and south-central Texas regional development decision makers. To reduce dependence on the already over-taxed, Edwards aquifer, a solution, the Applewhite Dam and Reservoir Project, was developed with wide acceptance by federal, state, and city leaders who regarded the project as a necessary measure for regional growth and development. However, opposition by taxpayer and environmental groups led to referendums of 1991 and 1994 in which voters blocked construction of the dam and reservoir leaving the city with limited options for water provision. This case study investigated the factors which led to a clear mismatch in communication between decision makers-those who were aware of the actual and quantifiable risk to the region in terms of reduced water supplies-and the general public, a population that did not have complete and/or adequate knowledge of their actual risk regarding future water shortages, nor, of solutions being developed, such as the Applewhite project. The findings from this case study indicate that when municipal leadership fails to adequately communicate risk regarding resource shortage to an affected public, as well as, openly planned solutions, that voters are likely to underestimate future impacts of water shortages, heed last-minute opposition, and reject long-standing, publicly proposed projects. The intent of this research is not to support either side in the Applewhite controversy, but to shed perspective on the process of adequately and effectively communicating future water needs to an at-risk population. Decision makers in cities across the United States who are faced