Texas

These are the proposals lawmakers hope will save Texas’ water supply. Track them here.

Published

10 months ago

March 17, 2025

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.

Source link

Click to comment

Texas

Arizona State transfer RB Raleek Brown commits to Texas

Published

12 hours ago

January 8, 2026

Press Room

Arizona State transfer RB Raleek Brown commits to Texas

Recruiting a running back out of the NCAA transfer portal wasn’t clean and simple after the winter window opened last week, but the Texas Longhorns were able to land a huge commitment from Arizona State transfer Raleek Brown on Thursday.

The 5’9, 196-pounder has one season of eligibility remaining.

Texas offered Brown out of Mater Dei High School in Santa Ana (Calif.) when he was a top-100 prospect in the 2022 recruiting class. A consensus four-star prospect ranked as the No. 3 running back nationally in the 247Sports Composite rankings, Brown committed to home-state USC without taking any other official visits.

Brown’s career with the Trojans didn’t go as planned, however — after flashing as a freshman with 227 yards on 42 carries (5.4 avg) with three touchdowns and 16 receptions for 175 yards (10.97 avg) and three touchdowns, Brown moved to wide receiver as a sophomore and only appeared in two games, recording three catches for 16 yards and a touchdown.

Wanting to play running back again, Brown transferred to Arizona State in 2024, but was limited by a hamstring injury to 48 yards of total offense.

In 2025, though, Brown finally had his breakout season with 186 carries for 1,141 yards and four touchdowns, adding 34 receptions for 239 yards and two touchdowns. Brown forced 53 missed tackles last season, 67 percent of the total missed tackles forced by Texas running backs, and more than half of his rushing yardage came after contact.

Brown ran a sub 4.5 40-yard dash and sub-11 100-meter dash in high school and flashed that explosiveness with runs of 75 yards and 88 yards in 2025, so Brown brings the speed that the Longhorns need with 31 yards over 10 yards, as well as proven route-running and pass-catching ability.

At Arizona State, the scheme leaned towards gap runs, but Brown has the skill set to be an excellent outsize zone back if Texas head coach Steve Sarksian decides that he wants to major in that scheme once again.

With one running back secured from the portal, the question becomes whether Sarkisian and new running backs coach Jabbar Juluke want to add a big-bodied back to the roster or are comfortable with rising redshirt sophomore Christian Clark and incoming freshman Derrek Cooper handling that role.

Source link

Texas

Texas leaders react to fatal ICE shooting in Minneapolis

Published

24 hours ago

January 8, 2026

Press Room

Texas leaders react to fatal ICE shooting in Minneapolis

article

Texas lawmakers are lighting up social media with opinions about the fatal shooting of a woman in a car in Minneapolis by an ICE officer on Wednesday morning.

Reports from officers differ drastically from those of uninvolved eyewitnesses — the official DHS stance is self-defense against a “domestic terrorist,” while bystanders tell a story of an innocent woman trying to leave peacefully.

The political internet arena Texas is divided along party lines. Republicans generally condemn Minnesota leaders’ reactions to the shooting, while Democrats are calling for ICE to be investigated for the possible murder of a civilian by an anonymous officer.

Texas Republicans react

Among the most vocal of the Texas GOP members after Wednesday’s shooting, U.S. Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-Houston) was quick to question Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey’s dismay at the incident. Hunt posted the following to X, formerly Twitter:

“We’ve hit a breaking point in this country when an ICE officer is rammed by a lunatic in an SUV and the Mayor of Minneapolis responds not with condemnation, but by telling federal law enforcement to “get the f*ck out!”

UNITED STATES – JANUARY 22: Rep. Wesley Hunt, R-Texas, leaves a meeting of the House Republican Conference at the Capitol Hill Club on Wednesday, January 22, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Hunt, currently in the running for U.S. Senate, later reposted a Fox News video of Gov. Tim Walz’ reaction. Hunt compared Walz to Jefferson Davis before posting a full statement later in the evening that reads, in part, as follows:

“The radical left isn’t turning the temperature down, they’re cranking it to 450 degrees. When leaders normalize this kind of rhetoric, the outcome isn’t hypothetical. It’s dangerous. It’s reckless. And it puts lives at risk. If violence follows, responsibility doesn’t belong to the officers enforcing the law, it belongs to the politicians who lit the fuse.”

Republican Sen. Ted Cruz was more to the point with his criticism of Minnesota leaders, reposting a different video of Walz and referencing the recent fraud scandal within the state.

Walz in the video said Minnesota is “at war with the federal government.” Cruz replied, “Is that why y’all stole $9 billion?”

Texas Democrats react

The other side:

State Rep. James Talarico (D-Austin), another candidate for the same U.S. Senate seat as Hunt, rang in from the other side of the aisle.

“At our town hall last night, I called for a full investigation into ICE,” Talarico said in his post on X. “Today, an ICE agent shot and killed a civilian. We should haul these masked men before Congress so the world can see their faces.”

State Representative James Talarico, a Democrat from Texas and US Senate candidate, during a campaign event in Houston, Texas, US, on Saturday, Sept. 13, 2025. Talarico is jumping into the Democratic primary for US Senate in Texas, taking on a former

Former U.S. Rep. Colin Allred, yet another Senate hopeful, also expressed his ire for the actions in Minneapolis.

“As a civil rights attorney, I’m outraged by today’s ICE shooting in Minnesota that took a woman’s life,” Allred said on X. “No family should lose a loved one this way. No community should live in this fear. ICE has become a rogue agency — operating recklessly, terrorizing communities, and now taking lives. To every community terrorized by these tactics: I see you. I stand with you. And I won’t stop fighting until you’re safe.”

Minneapolis fatal ICE shooting

The backstory:

An ICE agent fatally shot 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis on Wednesday morning.

Federal officials are claiming the agent acted in self-defense, but Minnesota leaders disagree. The shooting happened around 9:30 a.m. in the area of East 34th Street and Portland Avenue. The woman died at the hospital.

Witnesses told FOX Local that a woman got into a red vehicle and there was one ICE agent on either side of the vehicle trying to get in, and a third ICE agent came and tried to yank on the driver’s side door. One of the agents on the driver’s side door backed away, and then opened fire, shooting three times through the driver’s side window, witnesses said. One witness said the vehicle wasn’t moving toward the agents. However, federal officials said ICE officers were “conducting targeted operations” when “rioters” blocked officers. One of the “rioters weaponized her vehicle, attempting to run over law enforcement officers in an attempt to kill them.”

Officials said an ICE officer who was “fearing for his life” fired “defensive shots” to save himself and his officers, killing the woman.

A video of the shooting shows a red Honda Pilot blocking the roadway as an ICE squad approaches. When agents approach the vehicle, the Pilot attempts to drive away, moving towards an agent. When that happens, the agent fires three shots at the driver. Police say the driver was struck in the head. The agent appears to mostly avoid the vehicle as it speeds past and ends up crashing into a parked vehicle.

The Source: Information in this report comes from public statements made by Texas lawmakers on social media. Background comes from FOX 9 coverage in Minneapolis.

Texas PoliticsU.S.Texas

Source link

Texas

Texas investigations into Charlie Kirk posts spark free-speech lawsuit

Published

2 days ago

January 7, 2026

Press Room

Texas investigations into Charlie Kirk posts spark free-speech lawsuit

A Texas teachers union has sued the state over what it said was a trampling of educators’ free speech rights when hundreds came under investigation for their comments after the killing of Charlie Kirk.

The Texas branch of the American Federation of Teachers filed the federal lawsuit against the Texas Education Agency and its commissioner Mike Morath on Jan. 6, the union said. The suit claims investigations into at least 350 teachers after Kirk’s death were “unlawful” and that a letter issued by Morath to superintendents around the state targeting “reprehensible and inappropriate content on social media” prompted punishment and retaliation against teachers.

Kirk, 31, was fatally shot on Sept. 10, 2025, while speaking at an event at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah. The cofounder of Turning Point USA, a conservative youth-focused organization, Kirk was a close ally of President Donald Trump. Shooting suspect Tyler Robinson has been charged with his murder.

After Kirk’s death, a wave of backlash came in response to online posts condemning his views or otherwise criticizing him. Right-leaning public figures and prominent social media accounts called for firings of people whose posts they deemed inappropriate.

Morath’s letter on Sept. 12 directed superintendents to report “inappropriate conduct being shared” to the Texas Education Agency’s Educator Investigations Division, which investigates teachers for allegations of misconduct, the Texas AFT said in its suit, which was reviewed by USA TODAY. The union said teachers were investigated not for speech made in classrooms, but for posts made on their personal, often private social media pages.

“In the months since, the consequences for our members have run the gamut from written reprimands and administrative leave to doxxing and termination from their jobs,” AFT Vice President and Texas Chapter President Zeph Capo said at a news conference.

The Texas Education Agency didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Jan. 7.

Lawsuit claims teachers were disciplined for exercising free speech

The lawsuit filed by the Texas AFT claims that teachers in public schools have a constitutionally protected right to free speech, and that their speech in their personal capacity, such as on social media, is protected. The suit claims that teachers’ rights were violated when they were investigated or faced disciplinary action for their posts about Kirk. It also alleges that the policy to report teachers for “inappropriate” content was unfairly vague.

“These teachers were disciplined solely for their speech, without any regard to whether the posts disrupted school operations in any way,” the lawsuit reads.

Teachers whose cases are mentioned in the lawsuit were kept anonymous, Capo said, to protect them from further harassment. Many teachers are fearful to express any more opinions, effectively silencing their speech, he said.

One of the teachers, who made a post described in the lawsuit as one that “simply raised questions about the circumstances of Mr. Kirk’s death and did not promote violence in any way,” was shared by a lawmaker who used it as part of an election campaign and called for the teacher’s dismissal. The high school English teacher, who has taught for 27 years, was placed on administrative leave and later fired. She settled a wrongful termination claim with the school district, the lawsuit said.

Another teacher of 16 years and a military veteran who previously won “Teacher of the Year” in his school district and made posts criticizing Kirk for his views on Black Americans is under an ongoing investigation by the state agency, the lawsuit said.

“We denounced Charlie Kirk’s assassination, we denounced violence after Uvalde. We denounce violence,” said AFT President Randi Weingarten. “What happened in the next few days (after Kirk’s killing), wasn’t about violence or denouncing violence, it was about muzzling the expression of constitutionally protected nonviolent speech.”

Dozens lost jobs over posts about Kirk

In the wake of Kirk’s death in September, USA TODAY counted dozens of examples of people who lost their jobs, were suspended or investigated over posts or comments they made about the conservative podcaster, including educators, lawyers, doctors, first responders and others.

They include a dean at Middle Tennessee State, Laura Sosh-Lightsy, who was fired for a social media post saying she had “zero sympathy” for Kirk; a Marine who called Kirk a “racist man” who was “popped”; and Jimmy Kimmel, whose ABC show was temporarily suspended after he made comments about Kirk.

Some educators who lost their jobs filed lawsuits alleging their free speech rights were violated. A teacher in Iowa who compared Kirk to a Nazi; a South Carolina teacher’s assistant who posted a Kirk quote and said she disagreed with him but called the death a “tragedy”; and an employee of an Indiana university who said Kirk’s death was wrong and condemned some of his beliefs all filed suits on free speech, according to reporting from the USA TODAY Network. Each case kicked up a flurry of social media outrage and calls for the educators’ firings.

In Tennessee, a tenured theater professor at Austin Peay State University was reinstated after originally being fired for comments he made online after Kirk’s killing, the Tennessean, part of the USA TODAY Network, recently reported.

Source link