Tag: HD17

Priority House Bills heading to the Senate

My comments on a couple of bills that have passed the Texas House and are heading to the Senate. Bills have to be assigned to a Senate committee, have a hearing, pass out of committee and get to the Senate floor for passage. Only then can they get to Gov Abbott for signature to become law.

HB 4623:
relating to liability of public schools and professional school employees for certain acts or omissions involving students.

I’m shocked at how many times I’m reading about educators being arrested, put on paid or unpaid leave, or otherwise accused of sexually assaulting Texas children. Unfortunately, just like abuse of the elderly, too often these things go unreported or unaddressed. That means employees just move from district to district continuing the harm they’ve done in one place at another.

Y’all have the opportunity to stop this, to hold schools accountable for not handling these issues as soon as they come to the attention of school leadership.

Please get HB 4623 into the Senate process for approval ASAP so it can get to Gov Abbott’s desk for signature.

HB 3225:
relating to the restriction of access by minors to sexually explicit materials in municipal public library collections

Please affirmatively pass HB 3225 out of committee to a full vote of the Senate. Several of us went to the Bastrop Library a few months ago, pointing out to the library board sexually explicit books that were available in the teenage section. They were in a glass enclosed area, leading one to believe that parents could see what was there. But they were on the back shelves of a dual sided book shelf so unless one went into the room (as we did) there would be nothing leading one to believe these books were available to young teens. They would not let us read from the books at their meeting and have done nothing to remove them.

I was mayor of a town in NJ when computers first came into public libraries and successfully fought for controls on screens visible by the public. It was a tough battle, but we won and our children were safer for it. This is no different. Without parental consent (like actually buying such books for their children if they want them to have them) these types of materials should not be available for children.

SENATE BILLS IN THE HOUSE needing action:
SADLY, THE tEXAS HOUSE IS SITTING ON BILLS ALREADY PASSED BY THE SENATE.

The following bills have already passed the Texas Senate and are languishing in the Texas House. This is what happened in the last session. This is what many predicted would happen in this session as soon as Dustin Burrows was elected House Speaker. And, with the end of session looming and deadlines occurring, it is happening.

  • SB 571 (Sen. Bettencourt) | Enhancing Transparency in Educator Misconduct Reporting
    Status: Passed the Senate; scheduled for a House Public Education Committee hearing on Thursday, May 15, 2025.
    Details: This bill seeks to improve accountability by requiring schools to report educator misconduct (particularly related to student safety) in a transparent manner. Proposed amendments would mandate reporting suspected abuse to law enforcement within 48 hours and eliminate confidentiality clauses that could obscure incidents, addressing gaps in current reporting practices.
  • SB 13 (Sen. Paxton) – Enhancing Parental Oversight in School Libraries
    Status: Passed the Senate; heard on May 6, 2025, and awaiting a vote out of the House Public Education Committee.
    Details: This bill clarifies and strengthens current standards in public school libraries that will prohibit sexually explicit materials, indecent and profane content. It provides transparency and oversight measures that give parents a greater role in ensuring content is appropriate for their children.
  • SB 371 (Sen. Campbell) – Restoring Opt-In for Sex Education
    Status: Passed the Senate; referred to the House Public Education Committee, awaiting a hearing.
    Details: This bill requires parental consent (opt-in) for students to participate in sex education programs, ensuring parents have control over their children’s exposure to sensitive topics. It reverses opt-out systems that may assume participation unless parents object. A hearing is critical for this bill to progress before the session’s end.
  • SB 1224 (Sen. Sparks) – Mandatory Reporting of Educator Misconduct
    Status: Passed the Senate; referred to the House Public Education Committee, awaiting a hearing.
    Details: This bill mandates that school administrators report educator misconduct, such as abuse, to local law enforcement within 48 hours, with penalties (state jail felony) for non-compliance.
  • SB 240 (Sen. Middleton): Protecting Female-Only Spaces | Women’s Privacy Act
    Status: Passed the Senate; referred to the House State Affairs Committee, where it has been awaiting a hearing since April 28!
    Details: This bill aims to ensure the privacy and safety of female-only spaces, such as restrooms and locker rooms, by restricting access based on biological sex. 
  • SB 12 (Sen. Creighton) – Strengthening Parental Rights (Needs Amendments)
    Status: Passed the Senate; heard in the House Public Education Committee on May 13, 2025, awaiting a committee vote.
    Details: SB 12 does so many great things, including banning public education DEI departments in grades Pre-K—12, restores parental opt-in for sex education, and prohibits discussions related to sexual orientation and gender. However, it has some flaws so several amendments have been proposed.

tracking priority bills

Here’s the list of priority bills and their status from the TexasGOP: https://texasgop.org/89th-lp-bill-list/

Other organizations have priority bill lists, so find an organization that reflects your priorities, and check the status of the bills they’re following. Be sure to comment NO to stop bills as well!

Vote NO on HB3426: Digital IDs

This vote will likely take place on Friday, May 2 in the Texas House. Here are my comments as an almost 50 year IT professional:

Goodness. Haven’t we learned our lessons with hackers, with faked emails allegedly from our banks, credit card companies, brokers, etc? HB3426 is a HORRIBLE idea. More opportunities for cyber theft through digital duplication. Government is ALWAYS behind from an IT perspective. My background is 11 years with IBM and 23 years in a county IT department so I speak from experience here. We can’t ever stay ahead of the digital thieves. NO, NO, and NO! There’s no reason for this. It’s not hard to carry a driver’s license or other ID physically on your person.

Stand Up Texas!

Great read this morning from JoAnn Fleming of Grassroots America-We The People regarding the utter failure of Texas House Republicans to move GOP priority bills, to protect Texans and our Constitutional rights. Instead, we have Democrat bills moving quickly through the Texas House. Personally I’m hopeful most of them die in the Senate.

There are just 31 days left in this legislative session. More than 3 times that number have passed. And what does the Texas House have to show for it? Nothing except school choice and that was forced on them by the TX Senate and Gov Abbott. They’re going wring their hands and tell you they just ran out of time. HOGWASH!

The most important two words, I told my daughter, to be successful in college are “time management”. TX House leadership are masters at doing just the opposite and squandering time so important legislation fails to see the light of day. STOP electing these do-nothing House members. Next year, we have a chance to again clean House (literally) and elect conservative Republicans who will act like Republicans, govern like Republicans, and pass legislation that Republicans sent them to Austin to pass.

GRWTP-Forecast_-Political-Bull

Your Comments Count

Did you know you can comment on bills that are being considered in Texas House Committees? At comments.house.texas.gov, you can register your comments. Can’t make it to Austin and the Capitol for hearings? Take advantage of this. Voice your opinions!

This morning, I commented on two bills: the huge film industry give-away (HB 4568 ) and a bill to prevent Austin from injecting treated water and then later drawing it out from aquifer(s) in Bastrop County (HB 1523). FYI, there is a Senate companion bill to HB4568 that has already passed the Senate, SB22.

HB 4568 (Bill Text)

“It really doesn’t matter how much money the film industry is bringing to Texas. That, as a rationale for giving them Texas taxpayer money, is not appropriate. If I wanted to support this industry, I would do so with my money by going to movies. I rarely do. What I want is that you don’t take my hard earned tax money for a use that is NOT an appropriate government use. This bill picks winners and losers.

And, just the other day, CA Governor Gavin Newsom was bemoaning the fact that high taxes and regulation were causing the film industry to leave CA (https://www.lifezette.com/2025/04/hollywoods-film-industry-collapses-as-jobs-studios-flee-gavin-newsoms-ca-watch/ and https://www.siliconvalley.com/2025/04/21/can-tax-credits-save-californias-film-and-tv-industry-heres-what-legislators-have-proposed/ and https://deadline.com/2025/04/ca-film-credit-expansion-hollywood-workers-support-1236372913/). That’s right and we all know it. They’re leaving CA and coming to Texas, even without your massive subsidies rewarding them for doing so.

This bill regulates the industry: how much of the movie must be filmed in TX, how many Texans they must employ, and on and on. I’ve written two blog posts about how Texas seems to be turning into NJ with all the housing mandates y’all are considering. Now, you want to turn Texas into CA through incentivizing and regulating the film industry. Have y’all forgotten why people and businesses move here? FREEDOM. Every time you pass a bill like this, you take another step toward turning Texas into those states that many of us fled. I really didn’t think I’d see it in my lifetime, let alone this legislative session. I am ADAMANTLY opposed to this bill, this “incentive”, this tax dollar giveaway to the industry of your choice. They’re coming anyway… y’all just seem to have forgotten why.”

HB 1523 (Bill text)

“Forty-one years ago, five months pregnant, I returned to my home and found the notice in my door. We were notified we could not drink our water nor shower in it longer than one minute. Five months pregnant. On my little dead-end street of under 60 houses, there were 11 special ed students, five of us who had placenta previa at birth, one child with cerebral palsy, one who died from leukemia at the age of 5, one born significantly premature, one with tourette’s syndrome, and several miscarriages. All of those birthed children are around the age of 40+. All of us drank that groundwater water while pregnant.

Our wells were placed on the EPA Superfund list in September 1983. Once a water source is polluted, cleaning it up takes years and millions of dollars. My street didn’t pollute the water we drank. Others did but water travels underground. Containing pollution when it happens is extremely difficult.

This bill is critical to protect the water supply in Bastrop County: ranchers’ wells, agricultural well water, city well drinking water. Water moves underground. If Austin injects 1,000 gallons, what’s to say that 1,000 gallons will still be there when they choose to retrieve it? Will they draw Bastrop water, then, leaving Bastrop without the necessary water for its own purposes? If Austin wants to store its water underground, do so in Travis County which is home, according to its own website, to 3 aquifers: Barton Springs and Northern Segments of the Edwards Aquifer, Trinity Group Aquifers, Colorado River Alluvial Aquifer. And, perhaps Austin should concentrate of repairing old infrastructure so it doesn’t lose significant amounts of water via leaking pipes.

Hmmmm…. just musing…. Why is it that urban areas always want to “outsource” their problems to the surrounding counties?”

Why Do I Feel Like I’m Back in NJ?

Senate bill SB15 has been passed on the Texas Senate floor and has been sent to the Texas House. The bill’s authors are Bettencourt (R), Campbell (R), Creighton (R), Gutierrez (D), Hagenbuch (R), Hughes (R), Middleton (R), Nichols (R), Paxton (R) and West (D). Co-authors are Johnson (D), Kolkhorst (R) and Parker (R).

There’s an identical bill in the House, HB3919. Bill author? Gates (R). This bill was just referred to the House Land & Resource Committee.

What are these Republican legislators thinking? Why would they do this to any municipality: legislatively remove their right to zone their municipality as they see fit and as their residents desire via public hearings?

Sec. 211.052. APPLICABILITY. (a) This subchapter applies only to a municipality that:
(1) has a population of more than 150,000; and
(2) is wholly or partly located in a county with a population of more than 300,000.

According to 2020 census data, there are 19 affected municipalities: Houston,  San Antonio,  Dallas,  Austin,  Fort Worth,  El Paso,  Arlington,  Corpus Christi,  Plano,  Lubbock,  Laredo,  Irving,  Garland,  Frisco, McKinney,  Grand Prairie,  Brownsville,  Killeen,  and Denton.  And, there are 6 or more that will likely be affected after the 2030 census.

How long before those numerical restrictions change? Next session? Or the one after that? How long before a developer sues over the population applicability of this proposed statute should it become law?

These bills are an outrageous intrusion by the legislature into local growth and zoning. They demand that any currently unplatted lot over 5 acres must be zoned at 31.1 units per acre. Both bills say:

(b) A municipality may not adopt or enforce an ordinance, rule, or other measure that requires:
(1) a residential lot to be:
      (A) larger than 1,400 square feet;
      (B) wider than 20 feet; or
      (C) deeper than 60 feet; or
(2) if regulating the density of dwelling units on a residential lot, a ratio of dwelling units per acre that results in fewer than 31.1 units per acre.

Yes, you read the right. A municipality will lose control of zoning, not being allowed to require lots to be larger than 1,400 square feet.

There’s nothing in these bills that takes into account slopes, flood plain, wetlands or any other topographic impediment to small lot development. It says nothing about sewer, septic, water, parkland, open space or any other infrastructure. It makes no exception for home-rule municipalities. It’s as if every lot is just a flat sheet of paper on which one can draw roads and lot lines.

Only due to an amendment from the Senate floor can these municipalities zone larger lots over an aquifer. Well, isn’t that a nice hat-tip to our water needs?

The fiscal note for this bill in the Senate is a joke. It says “No significant costs to state agencies are anticipated.” Really? What about schools? Health care services? Road repair? Water resources?

According to the EPA, “The average American uses around 82 gallons per day per person in the household. That means a family of four would use around 10,000 gallons in a 30-day period.” And, in dryer areas like Texas, that use is higher.

Small lot zoning of 1,400 square feet, 31 to the acre, would require 310,000 gallons of water per month per acre. For a five acre lot, that is 1,550,000 gallons of water per month for just one such 5-acre development. And, these bills don’t limit that density to just five acres. Imagine the water needs of that density across a 20-acre development!

Schools? According to TEA, average state revenue to school districts and charter schools per student is $5,809. In the US, there are an average of 1.94 children per household. Even if we use only 1 child per household for these small homes, on average, that’s 31 children per developed-acre added into a school system. The cost to the State of Texas? $900,035 in required state funding annually for one 5-acre development. And, that doesn’t even address the local property tax contribution to a child’s education.

Morris County NJ was the 9th highest per-capita income county in the United States when I lived there. It’s the only state where property taxes are higher than Texas. Affordable housing is a major issue there as well. What we found, though, was that small lot zoning was very, very expensive to our property taxpayers because of the costs of services to support it.

In the mid-1980s, every municipality in NJ was mandated by the NJ Supreme Court to build its “fair share” of low and moderate income housing. This wasn’t Section 8 housing. It was low income housing for those who were under 50% of the median income for our Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area. Moderate income housing was for those whose income was 50% to 80% of the median income for our Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area. No renter could pay more than 30% of their gross income in rent. Originally, housing numbers were assigned by the courts. Subsequently, a Council on Affordable Housing determined each municipality’s “fair share”. Developers could build 5 or 6 market value townhouses for every one low/moderate income unit they provided. Housing was built and developers made millions and millions. All in the name of providing “affordable housing”.

The costs to municipalities? Schools, roads, police. Our town was 5,000 housing units, mostly small formerly summer cottages for New Yorkers that in the 1950s had been turned into year round homes. They were on small lots. Yet, we were ordered to build 924 units of low & moderate income housing. With the market-value density bonus, that would have been 5,400 new housing units to be built in 6 years. The impacts would have been devastating. Hence the fight. Hence my raising my hand to say “Someone needs to stop this.” Cripe, our town fought hard against 6 or 7 to the acre, not 31.1 as demanded in these TX bills. Yes, we built housing, some family, some seniors, some townhouses, some duplexes. And yes, the demand for services significantly increased. And no, property taxes did not go down. In fact, they went up.

What are these TEXAS Republican legislators thinking? Apparently, they are not. The same old story: developers make millions and taxpayers are left paying the bill.

SUMMARY OF THIS BLOG AS SUBMITTED TO THE LAND & RESOURCES COMMITTEE OF THE TEXAS HOUSE on march 28, 2025.

DO NOT PASS THIS BILL. To read my full blog post on it, use this link: https://republicancarol.org/why-do-i-feel-like-im-back-in-nj/ Along with 5 citizens, I started a citizens group to fight mandated low and moderate income housing in NJ in the 1980s. I spent 8 years on the Planning Board, 6 years on the Town Council and 4 years as Mayor in Denville Township NJ as a result. I never thought I’d see this in Texas. Here, it’s y’all in the legislature. There, it was the courts. The density given to developers in our case was 6 or 7 units/acre. This TX bill forces THIRTY ONE units per acre! The Senate fiscal report totally ignores the consequences to local municipalities and the State of Texas for such forced high density. There are those that actually cost taxpayers: schools, roads, police, healthcare, other municipal services. Then there are the resources: water, sewage treatment, loss of wetlands, runoff, flooding, parks, open spaces. This bill mandates 31 units/acres on 5 acres OR MORE.

Let’s talk water requirements: According to the EPA, “The average American uses around 82 gallons per day per person in the household. That means a family of four would use around 10,000 gallons in a 30-day period.” And, in dryer areas like Texas, that use is higher. Small lot zoning of 1,400 square feet, 31 to the acre, would require 310,000 gallons of water per month per acre. That is 1,550,000 gallons of water per month for just one such 5-acre development. For 2 people per household, that’s still 775,000 gal/month/5-acre development. And, these bills don’t limit that density to just five acres. Imagine the water needs of that density across a 20-acre development!

Schools? According to TEA, average state revenue to school districts and charter schools per student is $5,809. In the US, there are an average of 1.94 children per household. Even if we use only 1 child per household for these small homes, on average, that’s 31 children per developed-acre added into a school system. The cost to the State of Texas? $900,395 in required state funding for one 5-acre development. And, then there’s the local property tax contribution to a child’s education. How many of these developments will there be? According to 2020 census data, there are 19 affected municipalities. How long before those numerical restrictions change? Next session? Or the one after that? How long before a developer sues over the population applicability of this proposed statute should it become law? And, what if they win so every developer gets this benefit in every municipality? The legislature will have created a nightmare in Texas.

NJ is the only state with property taxes higher than TX. And, forced high-density low & moderate income housing did nothing but drive them up. This is the same old story. Developers get more density, make millions, and taxpayers are left paying the bill. Please tell me I’m reading this bill wrong because if not, this is a horrible idea.

Bastrop County: Back This Bill

March 15 update: House Bill 4946 has not yet been assigned to a committee. I’ll update this post once this happens with committee contact information.

Last legislative session, I wrote a bill that would allow the County Commissioners, if they so chose, to manage growth on unincorporated lands. Cities already have the right to do so, but Bastrop County is more than 97% unincorporated land, so no future planning allowed. We see it and feel it.

Representative Stan Gerdes worked with me on the bill. It had the unanimous support of the Bastrop County Commissioners Court. It made it to a committee where it died. That bill would have applied to smallish counties that bordered on the 6 counties (at the time) with populations over one million.

HB4946 SnippetThe bill is back this session. Special thanks to Rep Gerdes and his staff for, once again, shepherding this through the process. Bill number 4946 is exactly the same as the 2023 bill, but now applies only to the five counties in HD17: Bastrop, Burleson, Caldwell, Lee and Milam.

Below is a chart showing the amount of unincorporated land in each, and their rate of growth from the 2010 to 2020 Census. Bastrop County grew at a whopping rate of 31% in just 10 years.
chart showing unincorporated land in HD17 counties

This bill would allow planning for roads, infrastructure, water resources and other affects of rapid development. It would go a long way in keeping Bastrop County from being East Austin. Please contact Representative Stan Gerdes office in support of this bill: Contact form or by phone: (512) 463-0682.

Key points in House Bill 4946:

  • This is enabling legislation, meaning a county does not have to do it if they don’t want to.
  • If the governing body chooses not to do this, there is a petition process to get the question to the ballot so voters can decide.
  • The commissioners court must appoint a Planning Commission which will adopt a comprehensive plan for the growth and development of the county only after noticed public hearing(s) on that plan.
  • The commissioners court must also hold noticed public hearings on the plan and regulations before final adoption.
  • Current non-commercial agricultural and ranching operations are unaffected. Commercial agricultural and ranching operations may be reasonably restricted only “to protect the public health, safety, peace, morals, and general welfare”.
  • Protection of historic designated areas keep the current protections.
  • Affected property owners may protest adoption under rules set forth in the bill.
  • A commissioners court may grant special exceptions due to hardship.
  • The Act would take effect September 1, 2025.

Campaign Literature 101

It’s started. The other day I received this piece of campaign literature from Representative Stan Gerdes. Oops! I’ll bet that’s what you thought too.

No. It wasn’t from Stan Gerdes. It was about Stan Gerdes. It was from Americans for Prosperity.

About a year ago, I wrote a post called “Read Between the Lines” about campaign literature. All campaign literature is sophisticated marketing material. It’s meant to manipulate. Don’t be fooled.

This piece of literature was paid for by Americans for Prosperity (AFP). That’s a PAC, a political action committee. Who are they? Who else have they funded?

A look at their legally required reporting to the Texas Ethics Commission shows AFP supported ten current Republican Texas House members1. Six of those ten voted to impeach Ken Paxton, including Stan Gerdes. The other five were Angie Chen Button, Janie Lopez, John Lujan, Morgan Meyer, and Ben Bumgarner.

School Choice

So while Stan Gerdes and the other five have all signed on as co-sponsors of HB3, the House bill on Education Savings Accounts, they also voted to impeach Ken Paxton.

Did you know there are two school choice bills? Maybe not and this literature doesn’t tell you that.

The Texas Senate has passed one (SB2) and has sent it to the Texas House for consideration. And, that’s where it sits.

The Texas House has its own bill (HB3) and that one has its first public hearing on Tuesday March 11. Should that pass as it is written, the Senate and House will have to come together to iron out the differences between the two bills. If they can’t do that, school choice will not make it to the Governor’s desk.

If you’re going to call Stan Gerdes’ office as this literature suggests, ask which of the two bills he supports. If his staff says the House bill, HB3, ask if he’d also support the Senate bill. If not, why not. The devil is in the details, as they say.

Read Between the Lines

1 Only one rep receiving AFP donations voted against Ken Paxton’s impeachment. The other three are new reps.