Relating to the powers, duties, and governance of the Starr County Drainage District, the change of the name of the Starr County Drainage District to the Starr County Drainage and Groundwater Conservation District, the dissolution of the Starr County Groundwater Conservation District, and the transfer of the assets and liabilities of the Starr County Groundwater Conservation District to the Starr County Drainage and Groundwater Conservation District; authorizing the imposition of a tax.

89th Legislature (2025) Introduced by Ryan Guillen and 1 co-sponsor

Texas consolidates Starr County's separate drainage and groundwater districts into one entity with tax-imposing authority, effective September 1, 2025.

Effective on 9/1/25

#countygovernment--general(i0096) #environment--water(i0320) #starrcounty(g0258) #starrcountydrainageandgroundwaterconservationdistrict(dy3bi) #starrcountydrainagedistrict(d79ne) #starrcountygroundwaterconservationdistrict(do1va) #specialdistricts&authorities--groundwaterconservedist.(i0013) #water--conservation(i097l)

Legislative bill overview

HB 5320 merges two separate water management entities in Starr County, Texas—the Drainage District and the Groundwater Conservation District—into a single consolidated agency called the Starr County Drainage and Groundwater Conservation District. The bill transfers all assets, liabilities, and authority from the dissolved groundwater district to the new unified entity and authorizes the consolidated district to impose taxes.

Why is this important

Water management in South Texas involves competing demands between surface water drainage and groundwater conservation, which historically have been handled by separate bureaucracies. This consolidation aims to streamline operations, reduce administrative overhead, and create a unified approach to managing both drainage and groundwater resources in a region where water availability is economically critical for agriculture and communities. The tax authorization gives the new district revenue-raising capability for infrastructure and conservation projects.

Potential points of contention

Governance transition: Consolidating two entities with potentially different board compositions, priorities, and stakeholder bases could create conflict over resource allocation and policy direction between former drainage and groundwater constituencies

Tax burden: Authorization to impose taxes may increase costs for property owners and businesses, with unclear specifics on rate-setting procedures or taxpayer protections

Groundwater protection vs. drainage efficiency: Historical tension between conservation (limiting extraction) and drainage (moving water away) may intensify under unified management if philosophical differences aren't resolved through new operational frameworks