Relating to the prohibited release by a public agency of personal affiliation information regarding the members, supporters, or volunteers of or donors to certain nonprofit organizations; creating a criminal offense.
SB 1299 would create a new chapter in the Texas Government Code restricting state and local public agencies from requiring, collecting, releasing, publicizing, or otherwise disclosing “personal affiliation information” about people connected to certain nonprofit organizations. The bill defines that information broadly to include records that directly or indirectly identify a person as a member, supporter, volunteer, or donor to a nonprofit organization. It also bars agencies from asking contractors or grantees to provide lists of nonprofits they support.
The bill includes a number of exceptions. It would still allow disclosure when the information has already been voluntarily made public, is part of certain election or lobbying filings, is produced under a warrant or subpoena, is used in court proceedings under protective-order or good-cause standards, or is collected by the attorney general or other specified agencies for limited enforcement or security purposes. It also permits certain nonprofit-related information in secretary of state filings, gubernatorial appointment materials, securities-regulatory contexts, and Texas Department of Criminal Justice security checks.
SB 1299 would also create enforcement mechanisms. A person alleging a violation could sue for injunctive relief, at least $2,500 in damages per violation, and potentially treble damages for intentional violations, plus costs and attorney’s fees. The bill expressly waives sovereign and governmental immunity to the extent necessary to allow those claims. In addition, a knowing violation would be a Class B misdemeanor. The act would apply only to disclosures made on or after its effective date of September 1, 2025.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available voting history appears strongly favorable, with the Senate passing related votes 29-2. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded floor or committee debate to identify detailed arguments. The narrow opposition suggests some concern about the breadth of the privacy restrictions, the civil liability exposure, or the criminal penalty, but the available record does not specify which issues drove the dissent.
The main point of contention is likely the balance between donor/member privacy and government transparency or investigative access. Supporters would view the bill as protecting nonprofit association rights and shielding donors, volunteers, and supporters from compelled disclosure or retaliation. Critics may be concerned that the bill could limit public oversight, complicate contracting or grant administration, or create litigation and criminal-risk exposure for agencies that handle affiliation information.
The bill would add Chapter 3001 to the Government Code and significantly limit how Texas state and local public agencies may obtain, retain, and disclose information identifying individuals as connected to nonprofits. It would also amend public-information treatment by making personal affiliation information excepted from disclosure under the Public Information Act. The measure creates a private right of action, waives governmental immunity for that relief, and establishes a Class B misdemeanor for knowing violations, thereby increasing both civil and criminal exposure for public entities and employees. It would affect nonprofits, donors, volunteers, contractors, grantees, and agencies that maintain records touching on political, charitable, advocacy, or membership-related affiliations.
The available voting history indicates broad support for the bill, with a 29-2 vote on Senate passage-related actions. No committee testimony or transcript is provided, so the record does not show detailed public debate. Based on the text and the vote margin, the bill appears to have been viewed as a privacy-protection measure with substantial backing, though not unanimous support.
The likely contention centers on whether the bill goes too far in restricting government access to information that may be relevant to oversight, ethics, contracting, law enforcement, or public accountability. Opponents may also object to the private damages remedy, the waiver of sovereign immunity, and the criminal penalty for agency personnel. Supporters, by contrast, would emphasize protection against compelled disclosure of nonprofit association and donor information and the risk of chilling participation in charitable or advocacy organizations.