What happened: Water service issues in subdivisions like Vander Ranch and elsewhere in Greenwood have raised questions about what power Midland County has to stop development or regulate utilities.

Why it matters: Understanding the legal limits of county authority and the structure of Texas water law can help residents know what to expect and what recourse is available when infrastructure falls short.

The big picture: Greenwood is an unincorporated community outside Midland city limits, meaning the City of Midland has no legal authority to extend water service there. Similarly, Texas counties also lack the authority to provide water service directly. As a result, residents must rely on private wells, private utility companies like Park Water Company, or a municipal utility district.

Drilling a private water well may be prohibited by deed restrictions, especially in subdivided land, where developers often include covenants that limit individual well use. This means some property owners have no legal path to independent water access and must rely on private utilities or wait for future public infrastructure.

Catch up quick: In 2013, Greenwood residents voted to establish the Midland County Utility District (MCUD), a special-purpose district with taxing authority but no affiliation with Midland County government. The goal was to eventually provide public water service. Over the past four years, MCUD has collected less than $14 million in revenue and spent under $2 million, mostly on engineering and water fees. With only $14.5 million in assets, nearly $6 million of which is restricted, the district lacks the funding needed to build infrastructure to serve its 35,000 residents. In May, voters rejected a proposed $645 million bond to build out the system.

Go deeper: Texas follows the “rule of capture” for groundwater, which effectively allows landowners to pump as much water as they can access, even if it depletes a shared aquifer, unless restricted by a groundwater conservation district (GCD). The Texas Supreme Court reaffirmed this when it declined to impose liability for drying up neighboring wells.

Midland County lies within a designated Priority Groundwater Management Area, identified by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as needing groundwater oversight. In its 2017 final report, TCEQ recommended that Midland County be added to a neighboring GCD, but no local petition followed, and TCEQ has not acted to impose a district. As a result, the rule of capture continues to apply in Greenwood.

Key points:

  • The limits of county authority: Under Texas law, counties must approve subdivision plats that meet basic standards for drainage and road access. They cannot deny development based on long-term water availability, impose zoning, or regulate building density. Counties also lack authority to operate water utilities or regulate private utility service. Some Greenwood residents argue that Park Water’s intermittent service and past quality issues pose a health and safety threat. However, for a county to deny development on those grounds, it must show a specific and imminent threat, such as no access to potable water. Intermittent or low-pressure service typically does not meet that threshold.

  • The limits of regulatory agencies: The TCEQ regulates water quality and wastewater standards, while the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) oversees private utilities that hold certificates of convenience and necessity (CCNs). These agencies aim to bring providers into compliance through technical support and corrective orders, not by revoking CCNs or taking over utilities. Receivership is rare and typically only occurs in cases of systemic failure, such as abandonment or insolvency.

  • The limits of unincorporated areas: As an unincorporated area, Greenwood has no local government and no authority to set land use rules, require infrastructure before development, or regulate growth. The only path under Texas law to gain that control is incorporation or annexation. To incorporate, state law requires a petition signed by at least 50 qualified voters, after which the Midland County judge may call an election. If voters approve, Greenwood would establish the governing structure of a city. To pursue annexation, state law requires more than 50% of landowners must sign a written request. However, the city can decline annexation due to infrastructure costs, service obligations, or planning priorities.

What’s next: Greenwood residents have a few options:

  • File formal complaints with the PUC or TCEQ.
  • Pursue a civil lawsuit against the private utility for breach of contract or tort claims.
  • Petition to incorporate Greenwood and establish local governance.
  • Petition the City of Midland to annex Greenwood into the city limits.

The bottom line: Texas gives residents a choice: live inside a city, where local government can regulate growth and provide public services or live in the county, where lower taxes and limited oversight come with minimal land-use control, and reliance on private water systems. Greenwood’s situation reflects a broader legal ideology in Texas that favors private property rights, personal responsibility, and minimal government intervention.