Texas
These are the proposals lawmakers hope will save Texas’ water supply. Track them here.
Subscribe to The Y’all — a weekly dispatch about the people, places and policies defining Texas, produced by Texas Tribune journalists living in communities across the state.
This article is part of Running Out, an occasional series about Texas’ water crisis. Read more stories about the threats facing Texas’ water supply here. It will also be updated through the legislative session as bills advance.
Texas’ water supply is full of uncertainties.
Leaking water pipes and deteriorating infrastructure plague the state’s water systems. Prolonged droughts and record-setting heat waves are depleting the state’s rivers. And a growing population is adding more stress to the system every day.
One state figure estimates there could be a severe shortage of municipal water by 2030 if there is recurring, record-breaking drought conditions across the state, and if water entities and state leaders fail to put in place key strategies to secure water supplies.
State lawmakers have proposed several possible solutions. Their proposals range from committing to annual funding for water projects to tapping into new sources, like oil and gas wastewater that comes from the ground during extraction, and making sure the quality of drinking water is safer.
There are a number of steps to the legislative process, however, and they all have to take place before a bill can go into law. There are 10 bills the Tribune is tracking — some of them have moved quickly in the legislature, while others have failed to pick up steam. Here are the steps of the process we are tracking:
Bill has been filed: This is the very first step in the process. A bill is written and introduced in one of the two legislative chambers, the Texas House or state Senate.
In the works: Bills are assigned to committees where a panel of lawmakers vet the bill and take testimony from the public. Bills must be approved by at least one committee before the full chamber votes on it. Both chambers have to approve a bill for it to become law. A bill may also go to a conference committee to reconcile any differences between the chambers on the bill before it’s passed.
Passed the House: The bill received a majority vote of approval by state representatives. If it is a House bill, it must go to the Senate next for approval. If it has already passed by the Senate, then it is sent to Gov. Greg Abbott.
Passed the Senate: The bill received a majority vote of approval by state senators. If the bill starts in the Senate, it will go to the House for approval. If it’s already been passed by the House, then it is sent to Abbott.
Signed into Law: Bills signed by Abbott become law. If there is a bill left unsigned but was not vetoed by Abbott, then it automatically becomes law.
Vetoed or failed: A legislative proposal failed by missing a key deadline or did not make it out of the original committee for a floor vote. Abbott could also veto any bills sent to him.
Here are the bills to follow:
Senate Bill 7 — A priority bill that establishes an administrative framework for how water projects — including building of infrastructure that would transport water across the state and fixing leaking pipes — would be funded under the Texas Water Development Board. The bill would also establish the Texas Water Fund Advisory Committee for oversight and the Office of Water Supply Conveyance Coordination to improve regional and statewide water infrastructure connectivity.
Bill has been filed.
Senate Joint Resolution 66 — A constitutional amendment to dedicate $1 billion to the Texas Water Fund for up to 16 years beginning in 2027. The annual stream of state tax dollars and insurance premium taxes would help cities and local water agencies buy more water and repair aging infrastructure. It calls for 80% of the appropriated money to go to the New Water Supply for Texas Fund — prioritizing desalination projects and pipelines transporting water from the water-rich regions of Texas to arid, drought-stricken areas. The other 20% would go to fixing aging infrastructure. The bill would expire in 2043.
In the works. Bill has been referred to a Senate committee on finance.
House Bill 16 — A sweeping priority bill that touches on water funds, flood plans, and the development of infrastructure to transport water into a water supply system. The bill would also create the Texas Water Fund Advisory Committee to oversee operations on each fund and report to the Texas Water Development Board.
In the works. Bill has been referred to a House committee on natural resources.
House Joint Resolution 7 — A constitutional amendment to dedicate $1 billion to the Texas Water Fund for up to 10 years. The annual stream of state tax dollars would help cities and local water agencies buy more water and repair aging infrastructure. It gives the Texas Water Development Board full discretion over the $1 billion, allowing it to distribute the money as it sees fit.
In the works. Bill has been scheduled for a public hearing.
House Bill 1501 — Directs the Texas State University Meadows Center for Water and the Environment to study how Texas can develop seawater desalination plants along the Gulf Coast. Desalination is the process of removing salt from seawater or salty groundwater so it can be used for drinking water, irrigation and industrial uses. The study will examine international desalination plants in Israel and Australia to identify best practices and challenges, including financial barriers and explore ways to dispose of brine — highly salty and concentrated liquid — including its potential use in nuclear energy production. The findings must be reported by Jan. 1, 2027.
In the works. Bill has been referred to a House committee on natural resources.
House Bill 310 — A bill that directs the Texas Water Development Board, the state agency that oversees water supplies and projects, on how to allocate money from the Texas Water Fund. The board would ensure a portion of the money is used for water infrastructure projects and prioritized by risk or need. It would go to rural areas with less than 20,000 people, and areas with at least 20,000 residents but no more than 150,000. It also calls for money to be spent on a statewide public awareness campaign about water.
In the works: Bill is pending in a House committee on natural resources.
Senate Bill 1145 — Authorizes the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to issue permits for land application of produced water — wastewater that comes out of the ground during the extraction of oil and gas production — and develop standards that prevent pollution of surface and groundwater.
Passed the Senate: The House has received the bill for review.
House Bill 2080 — A bill that calls for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to appoint a panel to review the duties of a groundwater conservation district. This would happen if someone files a petition with the TCEQ requesting an inquiry about a conservation district. If the petition is not dismissed, the commission would appoint a review panel of five members.
Bill has been filed.
House Bill 2114 — This bill aims to prevent conflicts of interest by barring engineering firms involved in state or regional water planning from also constructing reservoirs. It specifically applies to feasibility reviews assessing costs, timelines, land acquisition, and economic impacts. One example of a case is the $7 billion Marvin Nichols Reservoir, which groups estimate would flood over 66,000 acres of northeast Texas forest. A feasibility review released last year found no major obstacles to the project. The firm that conducted the review, Freese and Nichols Inc., is also set to build the reservoir.
Bill has been filed.
House Bill 1400 — Creates a new fund to support scientific research that will expand knowledge about the quality, quantity and threats to the state’s groundwater resources. It will be administered by the Texas Water Development Board.
In the works. Bill has been scheduled for a public hearing.
We can’t wait to welcome you to the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas’ breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Step inside the conversations shaping the future of education, the economy, health care, energy, technology, public safety, culture, the arts and so much more.
Hear from our CEO, Sonal Shah, on TribFest 2025.
TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Texas
8 convicted of terrorism charges in Texas immigration center shooting sentenced to decades in prison
FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) — A demonstrator who shot and wounded a police officer outside a Texas immigration center last July 4 was sentenced to 100 years in federal prison Tuesday, while other protesters accused of having links to antifa were given multiple decades in federal prison.
Benjamin Song was convicted of attempted murder last March after prosecutors say he opened fire and wounded a police officer at the Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado.
The seven other protesters sentenced Tuesday received prison terms ranging from 30 to 70 years.
“Our issue with this case has always been this isn’t a bunch of terrorists. This is a bunch of kids and young adults who really have a really big heart and really wanted their voice to be heard,” Philip Hayes, Song’s attorney, said outside the federal courthouse in Fort Worth. “It was never intended that anybody get hurt. It was never intended that any shots would be fired.”
He said his client would appeal the sentencing.
“Song, aside from this day, has had an impeccable life. A former Marine. A good student,” Hayes said. “He had a lot of good qualities that were just ignored. The judge went ahead and gave as much as he could.”
One of the defendants, Daniel Sanchez Estrada, was convicted of corruptly concealing a document and conspiracy to conceal documents. Others pleaded guilty to providing material support to terrorists rather than take their case to trial.
Prosecutors say the eight are members of antifa, a decentralized anti-fascist organization that has become a target of the Trump administration. They have denied any affiliation and maintain they attended the demonstration to show support for immigrants inside the detention center.
President Donald Trump last fall signed an executive order designating antifa a domestic terrorist organization, even though there is no domestic equivalent to the State Department’s list of foreign terror organizations.
Critics warn the case could have wide-reaching impact on protests given that organizations operating within the U.S. are supposed to be protected by First Amendment free-speech rights.
Short for “anti-fascists,” antifa is not a single organization but rather an umbrella term for far-left militant groups that confront or resist neo-Nazis and white supremacists at demonstrations.
Last week, federal prosecutors charged 15 people with impeding the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in Minnesota. They claimed the demonstrators were members of antifa who conspired against the federal government to block arrests and deportations by setting up blockades around government buildings and throwing chunks of ice at federal vehicles, among other actions.
Marcelo reported from New York.
A free press is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy.
Support trusted journalism and civil dialogue.
Texas
Paxton, Trump adviser’s org win bid to block immigration rule
A federal judge in Texas blocked a Biden administration rule on Monday that allowed immigration judges to indefinitely close a deportation case against immigrants on the same day Texas sued to stop the rule.
The rule, which was adopted in 2024, allowed immigration judges to close a deportation case after hearing arguments from the federal government and the immigrant in deportation proceedings, especially if the person could qualify for a benefit that allows them to stay in the country legally.
But on Monday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas in Wichita Falls to block the rule with U.S. Judge Reed O’Connor, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush.
The lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice was also co-filed by America First Legal Foundation, an organization founded by Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to President Trump who has focused on ways to limit both legal and illegal immigration to the country. America First Legal Foundation also previously filed various lawsuits representing Paxton against the Biden administration’s immigration policies, which helped derail President Biden’s immigration agenda in his lone term.
In this latest complaint, Paxton’s office said in the 43-page lawsuit that the Biden-era rule “effectively grant(s) indefinite amnesty to aliens illegally present in this country.”
Lawsuits usually take several months to years to settle, but in this case O’Connor ruled late on Monday in favor of Texas after the Department of Justice filed its response saying it agreed with Paxton’s office.
Paxton’s office and the DOJ did not respond to immediate requests for comment.
President Trump, in keeping with his campaign promise, has cracked down on immigrants, using many of the federal government’s resources to limit immigration and fast-track deportations, including undocumented people and others who were allowed to be in the U.S. by previous administrations.
O’Connor has been known as conservative leaders’ favorite judge because he has routinely ruled in favor of Paxton, who has strategically filed lawsuits against the Obama and Biden administration.
The fast-paced end to the rule echoes a similar maneuver conducted by the DOJ and Paxton’s office last year, when the federal agency sued Texas over a law allowing undocumented students to qualify for lower tuition rates at public universities. Hours after the suit was filed, Texas also asked Judge O’Connor to find the law unconstitutional, which he did.
After the law was overturned, legal experts said a state working with the federal government so closely for the swift overturning of a state law was unusual and raised questions about collusion.
The quick resolution to the case late on Monday was heavily criticized by immigration law experts.
“This is madness! Deliberate collusion with a federal judge to rapidly erase regulations without any input from affected parties,” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow with American Immigration Council, a group in Washington, D.C., that advocates for immigrants. “It’s clearly an unlawful act by all, and now litigants will have to seek to intervene in the already-completed lawsuit to overturn his actions.”
Source link
Texas
US opens probe into fatal Tesla crash into Texas home
-
Los Angeles, Ca57 minutes agoAir quality concerns remain as the Boyle Heights warehouse fire continues to burn
-
Detroit, MI1 hour agoWenceel Pérez returns home, but when will he return to Detroit Tigers?
-
San Francisco, CA1 hour agoSan Francisco Supervisor Jackie Fielder to return following mental health leave
-
Dallas, TX1 hour ago
Impact: How Jeffery Simmons’ extension could affect Quinnen Williams
-
Miami, FL2 hours ago
Jaylen Brown bidding war? Haslem drove this? All the fallout from Antetokounmpo trade to Miami
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoYour next Uber ride in Boston could be a taxi
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoNuggets 2026 NBA mock draft tracker 2.0: What national experts predict Denver will do
-
Seattle, WA2 hours agoHow to watch Bosnia vs. Qatar in next Seattle World Cup match