Relating to the use by a school district or a school district employee of public funds for lobbying activities.
Summary
HB 87 would add a new section to the Texas Government Code restricting how school districts and school district employees may use public money and district resources for lobbying-related activity. The bill prohibits a school district from spending public funds to hire a registered lobbyist to lobby members of the legislature, and it also bars districts from paying certain nonprofit state associations or organizations that primarily represent political subdivisions if those groups hire or contract with a registered lobbyist. In addition, school district employees would be prohibited from using public funds or other district resources to directly communicate with legislators or legislative staff for the purpose of influencing legislation.
The bill also creates a private enforcement mechanism. If a district or employee violates these restrictions, a taxpayer or resident of the district could seek injunctive relief to stop the prohibited activity and prevent further related spending. A prevailing taxpayer or resident would be entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. The bill applies only to spending or expenditures made on or after its effective date, including payments made under contracts entered into after that date, and it would take effect 91 days after the legislative session ends.
Impact
HB 87 would amend Chapter 556 of the Government Code by adding Section 556.0056, creating new limits on the use of public funds by school districts and school district employees for lobbying and legislative advocacy. It would affect school district budgeting, contracts with lobbyists and membership organizations, and employee communications with legislators, while also exposing districts to lawsuits by residents or taxpayers seeking injunctions and fee recovery. The bill does not appear to change lobbying registration rules generally, but it would narrow how school districts may finance advocacy efforts.
Sentiment
Based on the available record, the bill appears to be introduced without recorded committee discussion or votes in the provided materials, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment to measure. The bill’s framing suggests support from those favoring tighter limits on taxpayer-funded lobbying by school districts, while likely drawing concern from school districts and affiliated associations that rely on legislative advocacy to represent education interests. Because no transcripts or votes are included, the overall sentiment can only be characterized as unresolved at the filing stage.
Contention
The main point of contention is whether school districts should be allowed to use public funds to hire lobbyists or support organizations that engage in lobbying on their behalf. Supporters of the bill would likely argue that taxpayer money should not be used for political advocacy, while opponents may contend that districts need professional representation to communicate education policy concerns to lawmakers. A second likely dispute is the private right of action, which allows taxpayers or residents to sue and recover attorney’s fees; critics may view that as encouraging litigation and increasing administrative risk for districts.
Relating to the authority of the Wood County Central Hospital District of Wood County, Texas, to provide brain and memory care services to residents of the hospital district through the creation and operation of brain and memory health care services districts.