(Tuesday, August 19, 2025)

The Senate met at 11:17 a.m. pursuant to adjournment and was called to order by the President.

The roll was called and the following Senators were present:  Alvarado, Bettencourt, Birdwell, Blanco, Campbell, Cook, Creighton, Eckhardt, Flores, Gutierrez, Hagenbuch, Hall, A. Hinojosa, J. Hinojosa, Huffman, Hughes, Johnson, King, Kolkhorst, Menéndez, Middleton, Miles, Nichols, Parker, Paxton, Perry, Schwertner, Sparks, West, Zaffirini.

The President announced that a quorum of the Senate was present.

Senator Hagenbuch offered the invocation as follows:

Father God, praise and glory and honor to You. O Lord, You've been so good to us, You've breathed life into us, and You've given us salvation through Your son, Jesus. Thank You for how You've blessed our great land and been so faithful to us. Forgive us for the times we've not been faithful to You. Help us to humble ourselves and pray and seek Your face and turn our ways. And You said, You will hear from heaven and forgive us, and You will heal our land. Lord, we cry out to You for the families that are hurting from the loss of loved ones in the flood. Lord, You are the great comforter, may Your spirit be with them in a special way now and give them the peace that surpasses all understanding in Christ. Lord, we lift up all those in our military defending our country, all of our first responders and their families. Protect them, give them great skill and discernment in their work. And, Lord, we pray for all of our elected officials, from our President down to local officials, including each Member of this body and their families, please bless them. Lord, as Your word says in First Corinthians, although we are many members with our differences, we are one body. Work within us to do Your will to serve the people of Texas well. In Jesus' name. Amen.

Senator Zaffirini moved that the reading of the Journal of the proceedings of the previous day be dispensed with and the Journal be approved as printed.

The motion prevailed without objection.

The following Message from the Governor was read and was referred to the Committee on Nominations:

August 19, 2025

Austin, Texas

TO THE SENATE OF THE EIGHTY-NINTH LEGISLATURE, SECOND CALLED SESSION:

I ask the advice, consent and confirmation of the Senate with respect to the following appointments:

COUNSELORS, TEXAS STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS OF PROFESSIONAL

Nadia M. Stewart - Round Rock

Appointment Date: June 5, 2025

Expiration Date: February 1, 2029

DISTRICT ATTORNEY, 159TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, ANGELINA COUNTY

Amy M. Wren - Lufkin

Appointment Date: August 15, 2025

Expiration Date: December 31, 2026

HISTORICAL COMMISSION, TEXAS

John W. Crain - Dallas

Appointment Date: June 18, 2025

Expiration Date: February 1, 2031

Michael W. "Mike" Hagee (Ret.) - Fredericksburg

Appointment Date: June 18, 2025

Expiration Date: February 1, 2031

Vernona K. "Kay" Hindes - Pleasanton

Appointment Date: June 18, 2025

Expiration Date: February 1, 2031

Gilbert E. "Pete" Peterson III - Alpine

Appointment Date: June 18, 2025

Expiration Date: February 1, 2031

Robert D. "Dick" Tips - San Antonio

Appointment Date: June 18, 2025

Expiration Date: February 1, 2031

INFORMATION RESOURCES, DEPARTMENT OF

Glenn A. Hegar Jr. - Katy

Appointment Date: July 1, 2025

Expiration Date: February 1, 2031

JUDGE, 318TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, MIDLAND COUNTY

Brent A. Morgan - Midland

Appointment Date: August 15, 2025

Expiration Date: December 31, 2026

JUDGE, 62ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT, DELTA, FRANKLIN, HOPKINS, AND LAMAR COUNTIES

Gary D. Young - Paris

Appointment Date: June 23, 2025

Expiration Date: December 31, 2026

JUDGE, 75TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, LIBERTY COUNTY

Jan "Michelle" Mangum-Merendino - Liberty

Appointment Date: August 15, 2025

Expiration Date: December 31, 2026

ONE-CALL BOARD OF TEXAS

Keith L. Wall - Spring

Appointment Date: June 10, 2025

Expiration Date: August 31, 2026

PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION

John A. McCall Jr., O.D. - Grapeland

Appointment Date: June 3, 2025

Expiration Date: February 1, 2031

PSYCHOLOGISTS, TEXAS STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS OF

Brian E. Rentsch - Grapevine

Appointment Date: June 10, 2025

Expiration Date: October 31, 2027

TEXNET TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Stefan A. Hussenoeder Ph.D. - Sugar Land

Appointment Date: June 23, 2025

Expiration Date:

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Greg Abbott

Governor

The President announced that the introduction of bills and resolutions on first reading would be postponed until the end of today's calendar.

There was no objection.

The President at 11:22 a.m. announced the conclusion of morning call.

The President laid before the Senate SB 10 by Senator Bettencourt at this time on its third reading and final passage:

SB 10, Relating to the calculation of the voter-approval tax rate for certain taxing units.

The bill was read third time and was passed by the following vote:  Yeas 18, Nays 12.

Yeas:  Bettencourt, Birdwell, Campbell, Creighton, Flores, Hagenbuch, Hall, A. Hinojosa, Huffman, Hughes, King, Kolkhorst, Middleton, Nichols, Parker, Paxton, Schwertner, Sparks.

Nays:  Alvarado, Blanco, Cook, Eckhardt, Gutierrez, J. Hinojosa, Johnson, Menéndez, Miles, Perry, West, Zaffirini.

Senator Johnson submitted the following reason for vote on SB 10:

Senate Bill 10 undertakes the extraordinarily important and complex subject of the maximum new property tax revenue rate for cities in Texas. Unlike the initiative to compress tax rates passed by the legislature in 2019, which was the culmination of a year-and-a-half of study and deliberation, and of an entire legislative session of intense wrangling and negotiating and testifying and discussing and learning, SB 10 comes flying at us out of the blue, in a swirling cloud of manipulated statistics and populist rhetoric. It's pretty savvy politics, I suppose—easy points, because everybody likes a tax break (I do!). But whether it's good policy is not answered nearly so easily.

Which is why it shouldn't be addressed in the first instance in a special session. The proposal in SB 10 does not come from a bill that advanced this session through the legislative process only to be tied up in the House Calendars Committee, or killed on a point of order, or even vetoed by the Governor. No, no one filed such a bill or even publicly talked about such a bill during the regular. But the Governor demanded some sort of sugary property tax relief sauce to mask the bad taste of this awful special session, and this was all they could come up with. A re-tread and a re-trade of the 2019 concept.

Changing the tax rate from 3.5% to 2.5% is so important, so consequential, so complicated, and so intrinsically subject to legitimate debate and disagreement, it could never be appropriately raised for the first time in a special session.

Here's the kicker: SB 10 does not even ensure lower taxes for anyone in the state of Texas. What it does ensure is more red tape–for cities, for the state, and even for taxpayers. It doesn't ensure that taxes will go down because, already constrained by the 3.5% revenue cap imposed in 2019, if pushed down to 2.5%, cities likely will turn to the voters to approve special elections to raise the cap. The voters almost always approve these proposals. Therefore taxes may not go down. They may even go up if the local voters so decide. Now there will be more, not less, incentive for cities to put that question to the voters.

And here comes the red tape: a ballot initiative, a local campaign for the ballot initiative, and confusing ballot language confounding voters.

If lowering the rate is a fiscally prudent policy idea — and we'll have a better sense of that after being able to observe the economy for another year, it can be more appropriately addressed in the context of a regular session after an interim of study.

JOHNSON

The President laid before the Senate SB 8 by Senator Middleton at this time on its third reading and final passage:

SB 8, Relating to the designation and use of certain spaces and facilities according to sex; authorizing a civil penalty and a private civil right of action.

The bill was read third time and was passed by the following vote:  Yeas 19, Nays 11.

Yeas:  Bettencourt, Birdwell, Campbell, Creighton, Flores, Hagenbuch, Hall, A. Hinojosa, Huffman, Hughes, King, Kolkhorst, Middleton, Nichols, Parker, Paxton, Perry, Schwertner, Sparks.

Nays:  Alvarado, Blanco, Cook, Eckhardt, Gutierrez, J. Hinojosa, Johnson, Menéndez, Miles, West, Zaffirini.

Senator Menéndez submitted the following reason for vote on SB 8:

Thank you, Mr. President and members. Members, I want to start off by reminding everyone that we are, yet again, discussing another bill that does not provide relief to the victims of the Hill Country Floods, does not provide any additional funding for flood infrastructure, and does not set any additional regulations regarding flood mitigation or emergency communications systems.

The leadership of our state had the ability to make flood relief and infrastructure the ONLY topic of the first called special session, but they failed to do so. Let me be very clear: Nobody on this floor is saying they want men attacking women in bathrooms or changing rooms. Women's safety is a priority for all of us, and those aren't just words – you can just take a look at the bills I filed last session that would actually protect women, such as:

SB 181, which would have required the Texas Department of Criminal Justice to adopt a gender-responsive risk/needs assessment to address pathways to crime that women experience and assist corrections facilities in designing holistic treatment and case plans catered to the needs of women specifically;

SB 182, which would have expanded program accessibility for female inmates through directing TDCJ to ensure that a wide variety of programming is available to female inmates and ensure they can be successful post-release;

SB 161, would have required registered lobbyists to complete sexual harassment prevention trainings and ethics training every two years.

And to note, I have filed this same exact bill since the 87th Session and it has never received a hearing.

SB 543, would have allowed for sexual harassment to be considered as a viable reason for an employee to receive unemployment benefits as they seek new employment opportunities; and

SB 2849, which would have required TDCJ to screen female inmates who are pregnant or have given birth for depression.

None of the bills I mentioned have received a hearing during the 89th Legislature, yet all of them are ways in which we can protect women in different spaces.

Especially as a male legislator, I always want to make sure I am approaching women's issues with data, evidence-based research, and most importantly - input from my constituents. This bill doesn't consider any of that. Studies have repeatedly shown us that transgender individuals are nine times as more likely to face sexual assault and sexual harassment in jail or prison. They are also four times as likely as their cisgender counterparts to experience intimate partner violence. But have any bills been heard to protect our trans Texans? No.

Allowing for this bill to pass will allow for the constant harassment of transgender individuals and will do nothing to protect women. It actually puts all women at risk for sexual harassment and physical violence. This bill will only harm individuals who do not fit the ideal picture of what a woman looks like, and it sends a message to every gender-nonconforming individual in our state that their existence is up for debate. This bill will also open up harassment of women who look too masculine or men who look too feminine. We have already seen the harms of bills like this as there were numerous reports last session of people in our State Capitol being filmed for using the restroom, and those videos being posted online. This is NOT okay, and frankly it's despicable that someone would spend their time policing a literal restroom, a place where folks go to relieve themselves, change their children's diapers, or help someone else use the restroom because they cannot do so on their own. ALL Texans' privacy needs to be protected.

You all listened to hours of testimony of individuals expressing their fear to use the bathroom because they just look different, or fear taking their child to the bathroom because they will be harassed for being in the "wrong gender" restroom. You know, even if you can't understand how this bill will impact folks just because they are different, it is almost certain upon this bill passing Texas will see an increase in suicide attempts and calls to our mental health emergency services. Studies have shown that upon passage of anti-trans laws suicide rates have increased as much as 72% in the following years of those acts passing.

Passing this bill will put more teenagers at risk for suicide and has the potential for a greater loss of innocent lives because they no longer feel accepted in Texas. Families will have to bury and mourn the lives of their loved ones because their family member was subject to harassment all due to their gender identity. I ask you all to consider the true implications of this bill before casting your vote today, think of how this bill will truly impact our communities. And ask yourself: do you want to lead with hate or love in your heart? We are not just voting on policy, we are voting on people's lives. Let's protect ALL Texans no matter who they love or how they identify.

To our LGBTQ+ community members and family listening, please do not give up. Please know that you have people here fighting for you and who see you. Please know you matter and that together we will continue to fight for a more just world for you and for all.

Thank you Mr. President and members.

MENÉNDEZ

The President laid before the Senate SB 15 by Senator King at this time on its third reading and final passage:

SB 15, Relating to certain files maintained by a law enforcement agency regarding certain employees of the agency.

The bill was read third time and was passed by the following vote:  Yeas 18, Nays 12.

Yeas:  Bettencourt, Birdwell, Campbell, Creighton, Flores, Hagenbuch, A. Hinojosa, Huffman, Hughes, King, Kolkhorst, Middleton, Nichols, Parker, Paxton, Perry, Schwertner, Sparks.

Nays:  Alvarado, Blanco, Cook, Eckhardt, Gutierrez, Hall, J. Hinojosa, Johnson, Menéndez, Miles, West, Zaffirini.

Senator Cook submitted the following reason for vote on SB 15:

SB 15 asks us to enshrine secrecy in statute, to create, by law, a system where those who wield the ultimate power of the state can shield their failures from scrutiny and their misconduct from accountability. 

Let me take you back to May 24th, 2022. Uvalde. Nineteen children and two teachers were murdered while 376 law enforcement officers stood in hallways. For 77 minutes, armed agents of the state, sworn to protect, failed catastrophically. What followed was a master class in institutional self-protection. Agencies stonewalled. Records were hidden. Information was denied. It took a legislative committee with special access privileges to uncover the truth. It took years of litigation to force transparency. Even now, families are still fighting in court for basic answers about how their children died. 

Under SB 15, those Uvalde documents could be sealed forever. Any communication "relating to" those officers, any report, any video footage, any record of what happened that day would be gone. Permanently hidden behind the magic words "insufficient evidence to sustain misconduct." Who would make that determination? The same officials who spent months crafting narratives instead of accepting responsibility? Could they investigate themselves, predictably find no wrongdoing, and seal the evidence of their mistakes forever?

In my own home, Harris County, investigative journalism on the excessive use of force in our jails led to life-saving departmental policy changes. The free press and public oversight boards rely on access to information to observe trends and hold our institutions accountable to the people of Texas. Under this bill, inappropriate and lethal use of force would go on unwitnessed and unobstructed. 

This is the law enforcement establishment's latest demand for special treatment. They already enjoy immunity that shields them from civil liability. They already have powerful union contracts that protect them from consequences (while unions for everyone else are under attack). They already benefit from prosecutor discretion that rarely holds them accountable. Now they want statutory secrecy to hide virtually all information about policing, incarceration, and law enforcement from public view. 

The families in Uvalde deserved better. The families who lose loved ones in custody deserve better. The taxpayers who fund law enforcement deserve better. The public that trusts a system with extraordinary power deserves better. SB 15 tells them all: "Your grief doesn't matter. Your questions don't matter. Your right to know doesn't matter. What matters is protecting those who failed you from ever being held accountable."

This chamber has a choice. We can tell the world that in Texas, badges come with a blank check, or we can reject this institutional power grab and remind the deep state, nobody is above the law.

COOK

The President laid before the Senate SB 12 by Senator Hughes at this time on its third reading and final passage:

SB 12, Relating to the duty of the attorney general to prosecute criminal offenses prescribed by the election laws of this state.

The bill was read third time and was passed by the following vote:  Yeas 18, Nays 12.

Yeas:  Bettencourt, Birdwell, Campbell, Creighton, Flores, Hagenbuch, Hall, A. Hinojosa, Huffman, Hughes, King, Kolkhorst, Middleton, Parker, Paxton, Perry, Schwertner, Sparks.

Nays:  Alvarado, Blanco, Cook, Eckhardt, Gutierrez, J. Hinojosa, Johnson, Menéndez, Miles, Nichols, West, Zaffirini.

Senators Johnson and Menéndez submitted the following reason for vote on SB 12:

Under the Texas Constitution, the Office of the Attorney General belongs to the executive branch of government; county district attorneys belong to the judicial branch of government. The legislature cannot change the constitutional apportionment of powers between two branches of government merely by passing a new statute. That apportionment of power can only be changed through a constitutional amendment.

Senate Bill 12 is, therefore, unconstitutional. While I and everyone who voted no on this bill takes the subject of election crimes very seriously, and fully favor the zealous prosecution of anyone who attempts to interfere with just and fair elections, there is a wrong way to do the right thing. Unconstitutional laws are the wrong way to pursue what might otherwise be just ends.

JOHNSON

MENÉNDEZ

The President laid before the Senate SB 6 by Senator Perry at this time on its third reading and final passage:

SB 6, Relating to the regulation of certain products derived from hemp, including consumable hemp products and the hemp-derived cannabinoids contained in those products; requiring occupational licenses and registrations; imposing fees; creating criminal offenses; authorizing an administrative penalty.

The bill was read third time and was passed by the following vote:  Yeas 22, Nays 8.

Yeas:  Bettencourt, Birdwell, Blanco, Campbell, Creighton, Flores, Hagenbuch, Hall, A. Hinojosa, J. Hinojosa, Huffman, Hughes, King, Kolkhorst, Middleton, Nichols, Parker, Paxton, Perry, Schwertner, Sparks, West.

Nays:  Alvarado, Cook, Eckhardt, Gutierrez, Johnson, Menéndez, Miles, Zaffirini.

Senator Blanco submitted the following reason for vote on SB 6:

In 2019, the Legislature passed House Bill 1325 with a clear goal - to create a legal framework for Texas farmers to grow and sell industrial hemp. It was about opportunity. It was about agriculture. And above all, it was about trust. Trust in a framework that would be responsible and safe. But somewhere along the way, that trust was broken.

Because while most people followed the law in good faith, others didn't. Some saw a loophole. And instead of asking whether it was safe, whether it was responsible, whether it was even legal, they asked how fast they could exploit it and how much money they could make doing it.

And now we're seeing the consequences. Across Texas, synthetic THC products -- some more potent than anything found in natural cannabis are being sold on store shelves. And they're being marketed like snacks, packaged like candy and designed to look harmless. It is predatory.

This is what it actually looks like. It looks like elementary school students who thought they were eating sour candy and wound up in the hospital. It looks like a 4-year-old hospitalized because he thought he was eating a chocolate bar. It looks like a wave of emergency calls and poisonings that no parent should ever have to face.

Since 2019, after hemp was deregulated, cannabis-related poisoning calls in Texas have surged 280%. THC-specific calls nearly tripled. And the number of toddlers exposed to these products–children ages 0-5 – went up to 550%. From 150 cases in 2019, to over 800 last year. Children ages 6 to 12 – they saw an 800% spike. In my hometown of El Paso, there were only 4 calls involving cannabis poisoning in children under 18 in 2019. In 2024, that number jumped to 43. That's a 975% increase in 5 years. And 75% of those calls resulted in hospitalizations.

One study found that nearly 1 in 5 kids who ingested cannabis by accident needed pediatric intensive care. The CDC reports that weekly ER visits for cannabis consumption among children have more than tripled since 2019. These are not isolated events. And it's not just the consumption of cannabis. It's what happens after.

Kids that are poisoned and hospitalized due to THC and cannabis experience vomiting, extreme confusion, impaired balance, rapid heart rate, anxiety, poor coordination, dizziness, dilated pupils, slurred speech, and respiratory depression requiring intubation, just to keep the child breathing. In severe cases, toddlers have experienced seizures or even lapsed into a coma.

This is alarming. But, unbelievably, I have heard opponents to this bill ask, "But did anyone die?" Is that what it will take? The loss of a child, that a parent cannot get back? For those of us that are parents, that is unacceptable.

As Legislators responsible for protecting those most vulnerable, as Legislators we should not wait for tragedy and death. That should not be the bar. This is a public health problem and a parental nightmare folded in one.

None of us intended this. It was never the goal of the 2019 hemp bill. It was greed that circumvented law. And they put their profit over the safety of our kids. And now we have products that kids can't tell apart from their everyday snacks. We can't ignore that. As a legislator, I won't.

Senate Bill 5 is about fixing what's broken. It protects public health and safety, especially for our kids, without affecting the Compassionate Use Program (TCUP). I've supported the TCUP from the beginning, and I continue to support expanding it.

As a veteran, I've seen what responsible, medically guided cannabis use can mean for people living with PTSD, chronic pain, and serious illness. Those patients shouldn't be left to fend for themselves in vape shops or to self-medicate without guidance. They deserve care from licensed doctors, and this bill preserves that.

Members, I want to make something clear. I believe we need THC regulation for responsible adults with safety standards in place for kids. I believe in personal responsibility and personal liberty. In fact, I'm a joint-author of Senator Johnson's bill that would establish strong regulations for adult-use products.

But that is not the bill before us today. The choice before us is not between banning and regulating. The choice before us is protecting kids now or doing nothing and allowing this crisis to grow. We can't ignore what's happening in our schools, in homes and in our hospitals.

Senate Bill 5 gives us a chance to act and to act Now. We must put our kids first, before the profit of bad actors. So, for these reasons, I will be voting yes on Senate Bill 5.

BLANCO

The President laid before the Senate SB 13 by Senator Middleton at this time on its third reading and final passage:

SB 13, Relating to the use by a political subdivision of public funds for lobbying activities.

The bill was read third time and was passed by the following vote:  Yeas 18, Nays 11, Present-not voting 1.

Yeas:  Bettencourt, Birdwell, Campbell, Creighton, Flores, Hagenbuch, Hall, A. Hinojosa, Huffman, Hughes, King, Kolkhorst, Middleton, Parker, Paxton, Perry, Schwertner, Sparks.

Nays:  Alvarado, Blanco, Cook, Eckhardt, Gutierrez, J. Hinojosa, Johnson, Menéndez, Miles, West, Zaffirini.

Present-not voting:  Nichols.

Senator Menéndez submitted the following reason for vote on SB 13:

Members, I have to ask, how many times have we debated this bill? At this point, I have lost count. Right now, as I have been saying time and time again, we should be focused solely on helping Texans recover from the devastating Hill Country floods that happened now over a month ago. That should be our only priority, making sure these communities get the relief and resources they need. And truthfully, had flood relief been the only focus from the start of these special sessions, we likely would not be here right now, spending time rehashing a bill that has failed repeatedly. Instead, we are once again debating whether local and elected officials should be allowed to hire professionals to advocate on behalf of their communities.

There's a reason we have not passed this bill, because so many of us understand it strips away a tool that cities, school districts, and rural communities rely on to have a voice in Austin. And what is even more frustrating is we cannot even get a consistent definition of what a political subdivision is. In one bill, charter schools are included, but in this one they are not. Members, what are we doing? Are we just picking and choosing how words are defined depending on what serves the moment? Frankly, I am disgusted that we have reached a place where this chamber is willing to pick and choose, where something is okay in one context but not in another, all to serve a political point.

We sit here once again to talk about these "fat cats on Congress" as if they are just some wasteful middlemen. But in reality, these "fat cats" are here representing many of our communities, school boards, coalitions, and leaders who are back in our districts, some near, and some far, making sure their constituents are well represented here at the Capitol. Without them, small and rural municipalities will face higher costs, lose access to critical conversations, and be drowned out by better-funded voices.

As a reminder, during the committee hearing in Kerrville, we heard from rural county judges who told me that this bill will hurt them and that they can't afford to be here all the time. Members, these were the County Judges from Tom Green, Mason, Menard, San Saba, and McCulloch counties.

As we sit here and debate this bill once again, let's think about the argument being made here. We continue to argue that these lobbyists are a waste of taxpayer money, because not every taxpayer supports what these lobbyists advocate for. But following that same logic, if I lived in your district and did not vote for you, my tax dollars would still go toward the work you do and the policies you advocate for. As legislators, we took an oath to serve the people of Texas and to advocate on behalf of our constituents, even knowing not every taxpayer or constituent will agree with us, we continue to serve them. But here is the reality, the same goes for the advocacy efforts from associations and nonprofits, who exist to support the same democratic process. Their advocacy does not come from back-door deals or special interests. They come from a collective, grassroots input, the same process used across the state to shape legislative agendas, just scaled to help cities, districts, and multiple coalitions that cannot be in the room every day.

This bill does not empower taxpayers, it silences them, especially those farthest from the Capitol. We should be spending our time on the real crises affecting Texans right now, not debating this same failed bill.

MENÉNDEZ

On motion of Senator Zaffirini and by unanimous consent, the Senate at 12:09 p.m. agreed to adjourn, upon completion of the introduction of bills and resolutions on first reading and the receipt of committee reports and messages from the House, until 7:00 p.m. Thursday, August 21, 2025.

HOUSE CHAMBER

Austin, Texas

Wednesday, August 20, 2025 - 1

The Honorable President of the Senate

Senate Chamber

Austin, Texas

Mr. President:

I am directed by the house to inform the senate that the house has taken the following action:

THE HOUSE HAS PASSED THE FOLLOWING MEASURES:

Relating to the composition of the districts for the election of members of the United States House of Representatives from the State of Texas.

Respectfully,

/s/Stephen Brown,

Chief Clerk

House of Representatives

The following bill received from the House was read first time and referred to the committee indicated:

HB 4 to Committee on Congressional Redistricting.

Pursuant to a previously adopted motion, the Senate at 8:02 p.m. Wednesday, August 20, 2025, adjourned pending the receipt of committee reports and messages from the House, until 7:00 p.m. tomorrow.

HOUSE CHAMBER

Austin, Texas

Thursday, August 21, 2025 - 1

The Honorable President of the Senate

Senate Chamber

Austin, Texas

Mr. President:

I am directed by the house to inform the senate that the house has taken the following action:

THE HOUSE HAS PASSED THE FOLLOWING MEASURES:

Relating to youth camp and campground emergency preparedness; authorizing civil and other penalties; making appropriations.

Relating to the interoperability of emergency communication equipment and infrastructure in this state, including the creation and operation of the Texas Interoperability Council, a grant program administered by the council, and the purchase of certain public safety radio communication systems.

Relating to certain measures to prevent and reduce fraudulent charitable solicitations and theft during disasters, including establishing a voluntary accreditation program for disaster relief organizations; creating a criminal offense; increasing a criminal penalty; providing a civil cause of action.

Relating to the authority of the comptroller to provide funding for the deployment and operation of certain emergency communication equipment.

Relating to disaster preparedness, response, and recovery; requiring a license; authorizing fees.

(Amended)

Relating to making supplemental appropriations for disaster relief and preparedness and giving direction and adjustment authority regarding those appropriations.

(Committee Substitute)

Respectfully,

/s/Stephen Brown,

Chief Clerk

House of Representatives

Pursuant to a previously adopted motion, the Senate at 1:10 p.m. Thursday, August 21, 2025, adjourned pending messages from the House, until 7:00 p.m. today.

Pursuant to a previously adopted motion, the Senate at 6:07 p.m. adjourned until 7:00 p.m. today.

The following committee reports were received by the Secretary of the Senate in the order listed:

DISASTER PREPAREDNESS AND FLOODING — CSSB 1

CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING — HB 4

SB 6, SB 8, SB 10, SB 12, SB 13, SB 15