
Financing the future: How special districts are shaping the path to attainable housing in Texas
'If we can't house our people — if workers can't afford to live where the jobs are — it's going to stifle the economy,' Robinson says. 'What we do at ABHR is help build great communities. We use innovative financing tools to make those communities more attainable for more Texans.'
One of the most powerful tools in Texas' housing development toolbox? The Municipal Utility District, or MUD — a mechanism Robinson and his team have helped deploy across the state to fund critical infrastructure and enable large-scale, master-planned developments.
What exactly is a MUD?
At its core, a MUD is a governmental entity empowered to levy taxes in order to finance public infrastructure — think water, sewer, drainage and roads. Originating in the Houston area more than 60 years ago, MUDs were initially developed to address the city's explosive growth. Today, they've become a cornerstone of real estate development across Texas.
'MUDs allow developers to shoulder the upfront costs of infrastructure in areas where cities aren't extending services yet,' says Kelsey Taylor, attorney at ABHR. 'That means development can proceed where demand exists, instead of waiting years for a city to act.'
Importantly, MUDs also promote long-term planning by allowing developers to phase infrastructure alongside home construction, resulting in cohesive, high-quality communities. These districts are governed by locally appointed boards and regulated by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), which provides layers of public oversight that enhance accountability and quality control.
Texas vs. the nation: What makes our system different?
While special districts are common across the U.S. — with California's Mello-Roos districts, Florida's Community Development Districts (CDDs) and Colorado's Metropolitan Districts — Texas' MUD system stands out for its financial structure and regulatory rigor.
'Texas' system is unique in that it is reimbursement-based,' Robinson explains. 'The developer takes the risk — building the public infrastructure and private development first — and is only repaid after performance.'
This structure, paired with tax-based financing rather than assessments, results in lower borrowing costs and greater financial stability. Since the current rules were implemented in 1989, Texas MUDs have maintained a 0% default rate.
'This is a performance-based system with very high oversight,' Robinson notes. 'It's efficient, it's stable, and it's the largest and most robust system of its kind in the country.'
Speed, scale and attainability
While MUDs don't directly shorten development timelines — they generally take about a year to form — they dramatically improve the financial feasibility of development by decoupling public infrastructure costs from home prices.
'If you can remove $100,000 in infrastructure costs from the lot price, there's a broader group of people who will qualify for a $400,000 mortgage instead of a $500,000 one,' Robinson says. 'That increases attainability, which in turn increases the velocity of development.'
Taylor agrees. 'In many areas, without a MUD, development wouldn't happen at all. Developers would simply pass on the opportunity. With a MUD, they can move forward, and that speeds up access to housing.'
Funding amenities and green space
Although certain counties — primarily in South and Central Texas — allow MUDs to issue bonds specifically for park development, North Texas does not currently have that capability. Still, MUDs play a significant role in creating amenitized communities by reallocating reimbursed infrastructure dollars toward parks, trails and public gathering spaces.
'Today's buyers expect more than just a home — they want vibrant communities,' Taylor says. 'While we can't use tax-secured park bonds in North Texas, we can leverage other financing tools to support those amenities. That's part of what we love to do: find creative solutions that enhance quality of life.'
A North Texas transformation
While MUDs have long been embraced in the Houston area, their use in North Texas has historically been limited. That's changing — and fast.
'There are more than 200 cities in North Texas, most with their own water and sewer systems,' Robinson explains. 'Development used to be constrained to areas where those services were available. But with rising land prices, interest rates and infrastructure costs, developers began asking why comparable homes in Houston were significantly less expensive. One big answer was the use of MUDs.'
Over the last decade, legislative changes and market forces have paved the way for widespread adoption of MUDs in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex. Today, virtually every major master-planned community in North Texas is using a special district to finance infrastructure — something that would have been rare just 10 years ago.
Spotlight: Viridian in Arlington
One standout example is Viridian, a master-planned community in Arlington that was made possible through a Municipal Management District (MMD) — a cousin of the MUD structure that offers expanded flexibility. Developed on challenging land within the Trinity River floodplain and adjacent to a landfill, the project faced steep financial and logistical hurdles.
"It is critical that cities and counties invest in their community development. These district tools can achieve best in class environments for cities with the right developers. Viridian is one great case study of PPP success," says Robert Kembel, partner and president of The Nehemiah Company.
Unlike traditional MUDs, MMDs can levy assessments to reimburse costs for features like parks and public amenities — expenses that are difficult to fund through bond financing in North Texas. That gave Viridian the resources to create a highly amenitized, high-quality community complete with trails, green space and even a 90-acre lake where residents can sail.
'Arlington didn't have much new single-family housing stock,' adds Robinson. 'Viridian brought it in at scale, in a part of town that had been previously overlooked. The district financing model made it all possible.'
The path forward
As Texas continues to grow, MUDs will play an increasingly vital role in ensuring that housing remains accessible, communities remain livable and economic growth remains sustainable. In Robinson's words, the model is the ultimate public-private partnership.
'Cities can't always move fast enough to meet demand,' he says. 'MUDs allow the private sector to take that risk, while still complying with public oversight. It's a powerful model that allows Texas to keep growing — and to keep the dream of homeownership within reach for more families.'
To learn more about ABHR, visit abhr.com.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
6 hours ago
- The Hill
The Great State Government Return-to-Office U-Turn
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) banned remote work for state employees in March. By June, he was signing a bill that allowed it again. This stunning reversal in just three months tells you everything you need to know about the new reality of government work. The Texas about-face isn't an isolated incident. It's part of a fascinating pattern playing out in state capitals across America, where rigid return-to-office mandates are collapsing under the weight of economic reality and employee resistance. What started as executive orders demanding compliance has evolved into nuanced negotiations that treat office attendance as currency. California's Gavin Newsom escalated from two-day to four-day office requirements, only to watch unions trade away salary increases to keep their flexibility. Indiana's new governor included 'limited exceptions' in his return-to-office order from Day 1, signaling that negotiation had always been the endgame. The numbers driving these reversals are impossible to ignore. When California saved $700 million by downsizing office space and Texas discovered that remote work actually boosted productivity while slashing turnover, the economic argument for forcing everyone back to their desks evaporated. This transformation reveals a new playbook in which location has become as negotiable as salary. The speed of Texas's reversal deserves closer examination. When Abbott issued his executive order in March banning telework for state agencies, he positioned it as a matter of principle. State workers needed to be in state buildings, he said, serving Texans directly. The rhetoric was forceful, the timeline immediate. Yet within weeks, the facade began cracking under operational strain. State agencies that had already downsized their physical footprints suddenly faced the prospect of scrambling for office space. Parking lots that had been decommissioned would need resurrection. And employees who had restructured their lives around remote work began polishing their resumes for private-sector opportunities. The bipartisan rebellion that followed wasn't driven by ideology but by data. Texas's own productivity study showed that remote work hadn't just maintained service levels — it had actually improved them while dramatically reducing employee turnover. When Republican Rep. Giovanni Capriglione introduced House Bill 5196 to let agencies set their own remote policies, he wasn't making a statement about worker rights. He was acknowledging mathematical reality. Abbott's signature on the bill in June represents more than a policy reversal. It's an admission that top-down mandates can't override bottom-up economics. But while Texas stumbled into reversal through legislative intervention, California's governor appears to be playing a more sophisticated game. His journey from two-day office requirements to a four-day mandate might look like escalation, but the emerging pattern suggests something more strategic. When the Professional Engineers in California Government secured their one-year reprieve from the four-day requirement, they paid for it with salary concessions. Days later, the attorneys' union struck a remarkably similar deal. Newsom's mandate created leverage where none had existed before. SEIU Local 1000's lawsuit challenging the order cites the state's savings of 'at least $700 million' from office downsizing — money that would evaporate if 95,000 hybrid workers actually showed up four days a week. The California Department of General Services has shed 1.2 million square feet of Sacramento office space, a 14 percent reduction that represents real taxpayer savings. Reversing that efficiency would require a real estate shopping spree at precisely the moment California faces a $12 billion budget deficit. The genius lies in how the mandate functions as a negotiating tool. Unions that might have held firm on salary increases suddenly found themselves trading compensation for commute time. The Professional Engineers accepted mandatory unpaid time off that effectively negates their 3 percent raise for two years. In both cases, the unions prioritized flexibility over pay, revealing just how valuable remote work has become to their members. These reversals illuminate a broader transformation in how governments value physical presence versus actual productivity. When Gallup research indicates that flexible work arrangements can cut attrition by 50 percent, and when replacing skilled professionals costs between half and twice their annual salary, the mathematics of mandatory office attendance stop adding up. Indiana's new governor, Mike Braun, seems to be taking notes from both states with his executive order requiring state workers back by July 2025 but leaving 'limited exceptions' for ongoing negotiations. For public-sector unions, this new reality requires strategy. The California engineers and attorneys who accepted pay concessions to maintain remote work flexibility made a calculated bet that their members value time and autonomy over marginal salary increases. They are establishing that workplace flexibility has become a fundamental term of employment that can't be altered by executive fiat. The return-to-office reversals sweeping through state governments represent acknowledgments that the fundamental nature of work has changed. We are witnessing the emergence of a new employment paradigm where location flexibility has become as negotiable as wages and benefits. The smart leaders are those who recognized that physical presence has become a bargaining chip, valuable precisely because employees prize flexibility so highly. Rather than squander political capital on unenforceable mandates, they are trading flexibility for concessions that actually improve their states' fiscal positions. The organizations that thrive will be those that recognize flexibility not as a perk to be revoked, but as a strategic asset to be thoughtfully deployed. Disaster Avoidance Experts and authored the best-seller' Returning to the Office and Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams.'
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
Texas outpaces job growth nationwide, Gov. Abbott commends economy
AUSTIN (KFDX/KJTL) — Texas Governor Greg Abbott recognized Texas as the leader of annual job creation in the nation. Over the last 12 months, Texas has led the nation in job creation, with 198,300 nonfarm jobs added. Based on June data, Texas set new records with the number of Texans working and the size of the labor force in the state. 'Thanks to the strength of the Texas economy, more Texans are working than ever before,' said Governor Abbott. 'While we pause to celebrate job gains over the year, we also recognize the strength of Texans throughout this disaster and the outpouring of support from our fellow Americans over the last two weeks.' Data about June employment from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Texas Workforce Commission shows that: Texas reached a new high with the largest labor force ever in the state's history at 15,850,100. Texas reached a new high for Texans working, including self-employed, at 15,210,500. The unemployment rate in Texas dropped to 4.0% over the month of June. Texas added 198,300 nonfarm jobs from June 2024 to June 2025, more than any other state and growing at a faster annual rate than the nation as a whole. To see the stats for Texas cities, check out the report from the Texas Workforce Commission. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword


The Hill
4 days ago
- The Hill
Americans support Trump ending Biden's green grift
The radical Left and the Biden administration treated climate policy not as an energy or environmental strategy, but as a political religion — one funded by the American taxpayer to the tune of more than $1 trillion. President Trump is right to shut off the 'green' subsidy spigot, and recent polling shows that Americans are supportive. The Orwellian-named 'Inflation Reduction Act' set aside $393 billion in green energy subsidies, funding everything from electric vehicle rebates to wind and solar tax credits. That may sound good in a press release, but it hasn't delivered for hard-working Americans. In fact, a recent Associated Press–NORC poll found that 72 percent of Americans say they haven't personally benefited from the federal government's climate initiatives. Worse yet, 60 percent of respondents believe the policies aren't worth the cost. Those numbers underscore what Texans—and energy-producing states—have long known: top-down green energy mandates don't work, nor do they help American families. Instead, they burden them. They raise utility bills, overload unreliable electric grids, and put America's energy security in the hands of hostile foreign nations like China and Saudi Arabia. Over the last twenty years, Texas has become the wind and solar capital of the nation, while electricity from natural gas has stagnated and coal use has diminished. Wind and solar have grown to about 37 percent of power on Texas' electrical grid, while coal power has decreased 21 percent over the decade. More than $140 billion in private capital has poured into wind, solar, and batteries in Texas, fueled by tens of billions in taxpayer dollars and a rigged price market. And what has it gotten us? Wind and solar have failed the grid time and time again, and they completely abandoned Texans just when power was needed most during Winter Storm Uri. They have also contributed to electricity prices rising 28 percent from 2020 to 2024. The Biden administration made 'Net Zero by 2050' the cornerstone of its energy policy. But this arbitrary goal isn't grounded in engineering, economics, or energy reality. It's driven by international climate conferences and activist talking points. Even the Associated Press admits that 42 percent of Americans aren't willing to pay even one dollar more on their electric bill for climate change, yet leftist Democrats keep forcing costly green mandates down our throats. 'Net Zero' has become a catchphrase for policies that force Americans to pay more for less energy, while weakening our nation's ability to compete globally — all to virtue-signal on the environment. Here's what radical environmentalists won't admit: the U.S. is already leading the world in emissions reductions. Thanks to the increased use of clean-burning natural gas, U.S. carbon emissions are down more than 20 percent in the last twenty years — a market-driven achievement, not a bureaucratic one. Texas has played a major role in this progress, proving that energy abundance and environmental responsibility aren't mutually exclusive. Meanwhile, the same administration that demonized fossil fuels was happy to enjoy their benefits. The oil and gas industry supports over 10 million American jobs and contributes nearly $2 trillion to our economy, about 8 percent of our GDP. Moreover, oil and natural gas still supply over 80% of America's energy, power millions of homes and vehicles, and fuel the very economy that underwrites Biden's climate spending spree. Texas does energy the right way. We lead the nation in oil and gas production. We have built the most resilient energy workforce in the world. And we do it while delivering billions in tax revenue, job creation, and energy security — not empty promises wrapped in green ribbon. Trump's move to roll back these subsidies isn't anti-environment — it's pro-reality. It is a return to policies that trust innovation and competition instead of federal micromanagement. It's a rejection of climate alarmism and an embrace of energy abundance. The American people want affordable, reliable energy. They want policies that put working families ahead of political agendas. They don't want to be forced into buying electric vehicles they can't afford, powered by grids that can't stay on. It is time we stop pretending the federal government can subsidize its way to a sustainable future. True sustainability comes from markets, not mandates — from Texas oilfields, not Washington boardrooms.