CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas — A new battle over groundwater is taking shape in Nueces County, as Corpus Christi moves to expand its control over underground water — just as a group of residents pushes to form a competing groundwater district of their own.
On Tuesday, City Council voted to expand the Corpus Christi Aquifer Storage and Recovery District, a move aimed at keeping the city in charge of its emergency wells along the Nueces River, which could eventually pump up to 28 million gallons a day from the Evangeline Aquifer.
But residents behind the proposed Nueces County Groundwater Conservation District argue the city’s action is about political dominance, not water security.
“The Corpus Christi Aquifer Storage and Recovery District claims to focus on conservation,” said Trey Cranford, one of the petitioners. “If that were its true mission, it would be called the Conservation and Recovery District.”
City Attorney Miles Risley warned that if the Nueces district forms first, the city could lose control of pumping limits — and face added fees.
“The district could limit how much we can pump — and charge us a transport fee,” Risley said.
While the vote passed, several council members questioned the transparency of the city’s groundwater district and its current leadership.
“If I’m having trouble finding it, and I’ve been on council six and a half years… what’s the public thinking?” said District 5 Councilman Gil Hernandez.
“Are there any board members that don’t work for the city?” asked District 1 Councilman Everett Roy.
One resident took it further, calling the arrangement a conflict of interest.
“It’s unethical, it’s a conflict of interest, and it won’t stand up to legal challenges,” the resident said.
In response, Council amended its motion, agreeing to appoint non-city employees to the groundwater board as seats open up.
Meanwhile, the petition for the Nueces County Groundwater Conservation District is under review by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ).
As the city works to solidify control beneath the surface, critics say the broader legal fight over who governs local groundwater is only beginning.
