Rolling Plains Groundwater Conservation District v. City of Aspermont, Texas

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Rolling Plains Groundwater Conservation District sued the City of Aspermont for water transportation fees and for a declaration that the City must comply with the District’s rules. The court of appeals held that governmental immunity barred the District’s claim for payment but not its declaratory judgment action. 258 S.W.3d 231, 236. While this appeal was pending, we decided City of El Paso v. Heinrich, 284 S.W.3d 366, 368-69 (Tex. 2009), which is consistent with the court of appeals’ ultimate holding with respect to the District’s claim for past due fees, penalties, and costs. Consequently, we reject the District’s arguments to the contrary. The City did not seek review of the court of appeals’ declaratory judgment holding. Accordingly, we affirm the court of appeals’ judgment.

The City, located in Stonewall County, operates water wells that are outside city limits but within the District boundaries of Haskell, Knox, and Baylor counties.*fn1 The wells supply roughly two-thirds of the City’s water, which the City transports from the District to Stonewall County. The wells were exempt from regulation until 2003, when the Legislature authorized the District to assess limited export fees or production fees for water transported outside District boundaries.*fn2 Act of May 28, 2003, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 992, § 1, 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 2896. Accordingly, the District amended its rules and adopted such fees.

The District sued after the City refused to pay export fees for water it transported outside the District. In addition to the export fees, the District sought late payment fees, civil penalties,*fn3 attorney’s fees, and costs. The District also sought a declaration “that as an owner or operator of groundwater wells located within the District and as a transporter of groundwater outside of the District, Aspermont is bound by and must comply with” the District’s enabling act, chapter 36 of the Water Code, and the District’s rules.

Rolling Plains Groundwater Conservation District v. City of Aspermont, Texas

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to The Recorder