The 89th Texas Legislature adjourned sine die on June 2, concluding one of the most consequential water-focused sessions in decades. This session, Texas legislators filed a record-breaking 9,014 bills and joint resolutions – the highest number ever filed. Of those, 1,221 ultimately passed both chambers by sine die. Notably, over 300 of the bills filed addressed water-related issues. Governor Abott vetoed 26 bills, including 4 that related to water.
A significant change in House leadership this session was the appointment of Representative Cody Harris as Chair of the House Natural Resources Committee. While Chairman Harris had served on the committee in previous sessions, his elevation to chair came amid uncertainty following the departure of longtime water champions Tracy King, Kyle Kacal, Four Price, and others. Many in the water community were concerned the committee might shift away from its strong focus on water issues that had become the norm over the past several sessions. However, Chairman Harris quickly put those concerns to rest. In the committee’s first hearing, he invited representatives from water associations and entities across the state to testify on the state’s most pressing water challenges. This early outreach set the tone for a productive session, marked by strong engagement on water policy throughout the legislative process.
On the Senate side, leadership remained steady with Senator Charles Perry returning as Chair of the Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs, continuing his well-established leadership and advocacy on water and rural groundwater issues.
While much of the water community’s attention, and rightfully so, was focused on the passage of HJR7 (Harris/Perry), the constitutional amendment proposing to dedicate $1 billion per year to the Texas Water Fund, and SB 7 (Perry/Harris), which significantly expands the authorized uses of the Texas Water Fund, important progress was also made on groundwater policy and management. Summaries of important groundwater bills – both those that passed and those that didn’t – are detailed below.
Groundwater Bills That Passed
Throughout the 89th Legislative Session, TAGD’s Legislative Committee closely monitored legislation with potential impacts on GCDs and groundwater management. In total, the committee tracked 271 bills, 43 of which were identified as Actionable Groundwater Bills – bills that made changes to Chapter 36 or otherwise directly affected GCD authority or operations. The committee reviewed each of these bills and took formal positions where appropriate. A 75% consensus among district members of the Legislative Committee is required for TAGD to adopt a position, subject to confirmation by the Executive Committee. Of the Actionable Groundwater Bills, 7 were ultimately signed into law. Each of these is discussed in detail below.
HB 1633 (Gerdes/Kolkhorst). This bill adds a new requirement to Section 36.113(d)(2) that a district, prior to granting or denying a permit or permit amendment, must consider whether the proposed use of groundwater would unreasonably affect registered exempt wells. While similar legislation has been filed in previous sessions, this version was ultimately successful. As with similar bills in previous sessions, TAGD supported this bill. An added benefit of the bill is that it may incentivize landowners with older exempt wells, particularly those completed before the formation of a district, to register them. This has historically been a challenge for many districts, but registration is now more likely if well owners wish to be considered during permitting decisions.
HB 1689 (Gerdes/Kolkhorst). This bill amends Section 36.207 to clarify that a district may use funds obtained from certain export fees to mitigate wells in neighboring districts that have been significantly affected by groundwater development. Such use of funds is only permissible if the district enters into an interlocal contract with the district where the affected wells are located. Previously, funds from export fees could only be used to mitigate impacted wells in-district. This change builds on export fee authority expanded under HB 3059 (88R) and provides a mechanism for districts to address regional impacts from groundwater development. TAGD supported this bill.
HB 2078 (Gerdes/Perry). This bill makes several changes to Sections 36.1071 and 36.108 to enhance transparency and accountability in the management and achievement of desired future conditions (DFCs). These include:
- Requiring districts to include in their management plans a plain language explanation of how the district is monitoring and tracking progress toward their DFC, as well as how the district has performed in achieving the DFC over the preceding five-year joint planning period.
- Requiring districts, during the joint planning process, to review the degree to which each district is achieving the DFC through implementation and enforcement of its management plan and rules.
- Requiring districts to adopt DFCs for each 50-year planning period, and interim DFC values for time periods not to exceed 10 years to support monitoring of short-term progress.
- Finally, the bill amends the explanatory report requirements to include a plain language explanation of any changes to the DFC and a summary of how each district is performing in achieving the DFC.
This bill came in response to recommendations made in the House Natural Resources Committee’s interim report following the 87th legislative session. TAGD was neutral on this bill.
HB 2080 (Gerdes/Perry). This bill makes several changes to Section 36.3011, which governs the petition for inquiry process at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). These changes were based on lessons learned during the agency’s first experience with such a petition in 2019. The bill is a refile of HB 5302 from the 88th Legislative Session. TAGD supported the bill. Key provisions include:
- Clarifies that the review panel is an advisory body, not a governmental body subject to the Open Meetings Act (Chapter 551) or the Public Information Act (Chapter 552) of the Government Code. However, the records and documents of the panel’s proceedings are public information.
- Requires TCEQ to reimburse review panel members for actual expenses incurred while performing duties on behalf of the panel.
- Requires TCEQ to post notice of a review panel meeting no later than 7 days before the date of the meeting and must send notice of the meeting to: (1) the district subject to the petition, (2) the petitioner, and (3) the county clerk of each county within the district subject to the petition.
- Authorizes TCEQ to provide technical assistance to the review panel if requested.
- Requires the Office of Public Interest Counsel to provide legal advice and assistance to the review panel if requested.
- Clarifies that the review panel may retain its own technical consultant or legal counsel.
HB 4630 (Kitzman/Perry). This bill updates provisions in Chapter 11 of the Water Code, related to artesian wells by clarifying that Section 11.202 applies only to wells located outside the boundaries of a district, subsidence district, or other conservation and reclamation district. Two important protections still apply statewide: artesian wells producing injurious water must be capped or plugged to prevent damage, and improperly maintained artesian wells may be deemed a public nuisance and abated by TCEQ. The bill also repeals outdated reporting requirements for artesian well owners. TAGD supported the bill.
HB 5560 (Harris/Perry). This bill amends Section 36.102 by expanding enforcement tools available to districts and establishing factors courts must consider when assessing penalties. Specifically, it raises the maximum civil penalty a district may assess for a rule violation from $10,000 to $25,000 per day, per violation, and authorizes courts to impose higher penalties if the violator’s economic benefit exceeds that cap. Courts must now consider specific factors when determining penalty amounts, including the seriousness of the violation, the violator’s history of compliance, and efforts made to remedy the violation. The bill allows courts to defer up to 50% of a civil penalty if the violator agrees to corrective actions and spends the deferred amount on mitigating the consequences of the violation or preventing future violations. For public water systems, corrective actions may include capital improvements such as securing new water supplies or addressing system water loss. The bill further allows courts to authorize water and sewer utilities to recover civil penalties from customers who caused the violation, provided the utility acted in good faith to enforce its drought contingency plan and the customers failed to comply. TAGD supported this bill.
SB 1583 (Blanco/Barry). This bill amends Sections 36.1071 and 36.1072 to clarify management plan requirements for districts. It requires districts to include the most recently adopted DFCs, and the corresponding Modeled Available Groundwater (MAG) values, in their management plans, and update their plans within two years of adopting a new DFC. The bill also addresses situations in which a DFC is petitioned. It provides that a management plan is still considered administratively complete if it includes the most recently approved DFC and a statement on the petition’s status. This status remains in effect until a final order is issued on the petition, or a new DFC is adopted. This bill came in response to a legislative recommendation from the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB). TAGD supported the bill.
While TAGD did not take formal positions on the following bills, each is relevant to groundwater and may be of interest to districts:
SB 616 (Schwertner/Harris Davilla). This bill provides that TCEQ may authorize by rule or permit the injection of water into geologic formations that underlie the Edwards Aquifer in Medina County and areas of Williamson County east of Interstate 35.
SB 1145 (Birdwell/Landgraf). This bill allows TCEQ to issue permits for the land application of produced water that has been treated for beneficial use. The bill also requires TCEQ to adopt standards for the land application of produced water, including standards that prevent the pollution of surface or groundwater.
SB 1663 (Zaffirini/Guillen). This bill allows TCEQ to provide notice of groundwater contamination to well owners by email, door notice, or other effective delivery methods and requires that notice be given to residents at each residential address within one mile of the contamination site.
SB 2885 (Flores/Buckley). This bill amends Sec 27.153, Water Code, relating to ASR wells. The bill provides that TCEQ may authorize by rule or by individual or general permit the injection of reclaimed water that has been treated to standards adopted by TCEQ.
Government Bills that Passed
There were several bills affecting government operations that became law and are relevant to GCDs:
HB 1522 (Gerdes/Kolkhorst). This bill requires that notice of a meeting of a government body be posted at least three business days before the scheduled date of the meeting. The bill also requires that the notice of a meeting at which a government body will discuss or adopt a budget also include a copy of the budget and a taxpayer impact statement which must include certain information.
HB 4219 (Capriglione/Zaffirini). This bill requires government bodies to respond in writing to a request for public information within 10 business days if they determine that they have no responsive information, or if they are withholding the information under a previous determination, citing the specific determination relied upon. The bill also establishes a complaint process with the Attorney General if the government body fails to respond to a request.
SB 480 (Perry/Canales). This bill clarifies that a local government (including GCDs) may contract with another local government, the state, or the federal government to jointly participate in research or planning activities related to water resources.
SB 1062 (Kolkhorst/Smithee). This bill allows a government entity to publish a notice in a digital newspaper if that digital newspaper meets certain criteria, including updating its news at least once each week.
SB 1494 (Johnson/Anchia). This bill allows a governing body of a political subdivision that holds its general election for officers on a date other than the November uniform election date to change the election to the November uniform election date in odd-numbered years.
Select Bills that Did Not Pass
Many bills introduced during the 89th Legislative Session had the potential to significantly impact GCDs and groundwater management more broadly. These proposals ranged from amendments to Chapter 36 to measures affecting the operations of state agencies and local governments. Although these bills ultimately did not pass, they merit attention due to their potential implications and the possibility that similar legislation will be filed in future sessions. The following section highlights several notable examples.
HB 1400 (Harris). This bill proposed the creation of a Groundwater Science, Research, and Innovation Fund in the state treasury to support enhanced groundwater data collection and scientific research in Texas. Administered by the TWDB, the fund would have provided financial assistance to groundwater conservation districts, with the condition that any resulting data or research be shared with the TWDB and made publicly available. The bill passed the House but did not receive a hearing in the Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs. While the bill did not pass, the bill author and Senate sponsor successfully secured $7.5 million in the state budget to support groundwater science and research needs of districts.
HB 1690 (Gerdes). A refile from the 87th Legislative Session, this bill aimed to increase transparency in the groundwater export permit process by expanding notice requirements. It would have required districts to adopt rules mandating that notice of an export permit application be sent to:
- each adjacent district overlying the same aquifer, if any, and the commissioners court of each county in those districts
- the commissioners court of all counties within the district,
- be published in a newspaper of general circulation in both the district and adjacent districts.
TAGD did not take a position on the bill. It passed both chambers but was ultimately vetoed by the governor, who stated that districts already have the authority to establish public notice procedures and therefore the bill was unnecessary.
HB 3898 (Raymond). This bill would have authorized the TWDB to provide financial assistance for brackish water desalination projects in certain areas of the state, even if the proposed projects were not consistent with the state and regional water plans. TAGD opposed the bill, citing concerns that it would allow projects to bypass the established water planning process, potentially undermining coordinated statewide and regional planning efforts. The bill passed the House and received a hearing in the Senate, but it did not advance out of committee.
HB 4111 (Guillen). This bill sought to make changes to the joint planning process by allowing counties without a district to appoint a representative to participate in the process. TAGD opposed the bill. It was referred to the House Natural Resources Committee but did not receive a hearing.
HB 4526 (Marinez). This bill sought to establish a grant program at the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR) to provide financial assistance to districts, and landowners not in the boundary of a district, to plug abandoned or deteriorated water wells. Twenty-four districts currently have plugging programs to assist residents in plugging abandoned and deteriorated wells, and TAGD supported this bill. This bill, and its companion SB 2506 (Hinojosa, A.), did not receive hearings in either chamber.
HB 4772 (Olcott). This bill would have increased the acreage requirement for exempting a domestic or livestock well from 10 acres to 100 acres. Additionally, it would have established a new exemption for any well located on parcels smaller than 100 acres, provided the well is incapable of producing more than 10,000 gallons per day. This bill was referred to the House Natural Resources Committee but did not receive a hearing. TAGD did not take a position on this bill.
HB 4896 (Garcia). This bill sought to make changes to both the designation of Brackish Groundwater Production Zones (BGPZs) and procedures related to permitting and reporting production from those zones. First, it would have allowed areas of geologic strata currently used for wastewater injection to be designated as a BGPZs, removing an existing restriction. Second, it proposed changing water quality reporting requirements from monthly to annual and allowing districts to schedule a hearing on a permit application before receiving the TWDB’s technical review report. TAGD opposed the bill. It received a hearing in the House Natural Resources Committee but did not advance.
HB 5365 (Munoz). This bill sought to limit a district’s authority to regulate groundwater production from wells used for cemetery irrigation. Specifically, it would have prohibited districts from: (1) reducing groundwater production during drought conditions to less than 80% of the non-drought allotment; (2) limiting production based on the availability of alternative water sources; and (3) assessing a fee or charge in lieu of imposing pumping limits. TAGD opposed the bill. It did not receive a hearing in the House.
SB 1623 (Johnson). This bill sought to clarify the process for dedicating water rights to the Texas Water Trust by distinguishing between surface water and groundwater rights. It added a requirement that groundwater rights be reviewed and approved by the appropriate GCD before being placed into the trust. TAGD supported the bill. Although it was initially scheduled for a hearing in the Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs, it was later removed from the hearing notice and did not receive a hearing.
SB 2500 (Zaffirini). This bill sought to expand the reporting of abandoned and deteriorated water wells by requiring TCEQ staff, or designated individuals, to report such wells to the TDLR when discovered during an on-site sewage facility inspection. This bill was filed in response to a recommendation made by the Texas Groundwater Protection Committee, which TAGD is a member of. TAGD supported the bill. It did not receive a hearing in the Senate.
SB 2658 (Perry). The filed version of this bill sought to exempt wells completed in a designated BGPZ from groundwater conservation district permitting if the wells produced water with a total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration of at least 3,000 mg/L and met certain documentation criteria. The exemption could be revoked if the well no longer produced water from the BGPZ or if the TDS concentration fell below the threshold. TAGD opposed the filed version of the bill. The Senate Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee approved a committee substitute that added provisions to strengthen monitoring and reporting requirements. It also required the TWDB to allocate brackish groundwater availability estimates to each district and county within a BGPZ. Additionally, several Senate floor amendments improved the bill, including one that allowed a district to revoke an exemption if it could demonstrate that production from the BGPZ was negatively impacting water quality in an adjacent aquifer. Ultimately, the bill passed the Senate but did not receive a hearing in the House.
What’s Next for Groundwater in Texas
With the 89th Session behind us, attention now turns to the interim, an important period for shaping the state’s future groundwater policy. Shortly after the 88th concluded, Chairman Harris called a hearing of the House Natural Resources Committee to hear testimony on a specific permit application to the Neches and Trinity Valleys GCD – a rare move and, to the authors’ knowledge, the first time the committee has held a hearing on an individual permit application. Topics of discussion included, but were not limited to, the utility of Groundwater Availability Models (GAMs), export permit caps, the Rule of Capture, and how MAG values are interpreted and applied by districts. Additionally, Governor Abbott has already called a special session to address several vetoed bills and flooding-related issues following the devastating July 4th floods in Central Texas.
Later this year, Speaker Dustin Burrows and Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick are expected to release interim charges that will guide legislative work over the next year and half. These charges often shape the water policy landscape leading into the next regular session. There has already been early discussion among stakeholders and legislators suggesting that the 90th Legislative Session may be particularly active on groundwater policy, with anticipated focus areas including export permits, brackish groundwater permitting, and district legal liability.
In alignment with its mission to promote and support sound groundwater management based on local conditions and good science, TAGD will continue to engage with state leadership on groundwater-related interim charges and policy discussions. TAGD will also assist its members in implementing legislation enacted during the 89th Legislative Session and in adapting management and operations as needed. Continued coordination with TWDB, TCEQ, and TDLR is also anticipated as agencies update rules to reflect newly enacted legislation.
Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts (TAGD) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit membership organization created in 1988 to provide a centralized means for groundwater conservation districts to engage and stay current on the quickly evolving world of groundwater science, policy, and management. TAGD currently has 91 groundwater conservation district members and 45 associate members.