Campaign Finance
05/17/2022

Runoff Candidates Raise More Than $17M for Final Push

TXElects

State candidates facing runoffs were required to file their runoff campaign finance reports yesterday (Monday). These reports disclose contributions received and expenditures made between February 10 and May 14. Most reports were available online today (Tuesday), and we highlight significant reports below.

Statewide

LTGOV (Lean R): Mike Collier (D) out-raised Rep. Michelle Beckley (D-Carrollton), $488K to $12K, and outspent her, $507K to $18K.

AG (Lean R): Land Comm. George P. Bush (R) raised $2.3M, spent $2.8M and has $731K on hand. The report from Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton (R) was not available online. He had $4.7M on hand as of February 19.

Bush’s largest contributors for the period included Dallas energy executive Kelcy Warren ($200K), Copperas Cove executive Jeffery Hilderbrand ($100K), Palm Beach (Fla.) executive Douglas Devos and family members ($80K collectively), Moultrie (Ga.) executive Drayton McLane ($60K), San Antonio investor Jamal Daniel ($50K), Georgetown executive Ray Hunt ($50K), Lewisville executive Ira Mitzner ($50K), Q PAC ($50K), Houston investor Bradley Cross ($40K) and Grand Rapids (Mich.) engineer Greg Bird ($33K).

On the Democratic side, Joe Jaworski narrowly out-raised Rochelle Garza, $373K to $334K, and even more narrowly outspent her, $370K to $366K. He holds a $73K to $37K edge in cash on hand.

LAND open (Likely R): Sen. Dawn Buckingham (R-Lakeway) raised $797K and spent just over $1.0M, both many orders of magnitude over her opponent. On the Democratic side, Jay Kleberg similarly dwarfed his opponent, raising $522K and spending $415K.

RRC (Likely R): Comm. Wayne Christian (R) raised $528K, spent $662K and has $341K on hand. Nearly all of challenger Sarah Stogner’s (R) $2M in contributions came in kind from Houston rancher Ashley Wyatt. She reported no expenditures or cash on hand.

Senate

SD24 open (Likely R): Former Sen. Pete Flores (R-Pleasanton) out-raised Raul Reyes Jr. (R), $500K to $216K, and outspent him, $609K to $238K.

SD27 open (Lean D): Morgan LaMantia (D) out-raised Sara Stapleton-Barrera (D), $265K to $126K, and outspent her, $1.8M to $123K. LaMantia added another $1.3M to her loan balance, bringing it to $2.9M.

House

HD12 (Safe R): Rep. Kyle Kacal (R-College Station) out-raised Ben Bius (R), $463K to $182K, and outspent him, $421K to $276K. Kacal’s largest contributors included Texas Farm Bureau AGFUND ($64K), Texas House Republican Caucus ($35K), Speaker Dade Phelan’s campaign ($33K), Charles Butt Public Education PAC ($25K), Texas Trial Lawyers Assoc. PAC ($25K), Associated Republicans of Texas PAC ($24K) and Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($20K).

Bius’s largest contributors were Conservative Action for Texas PAC ($24K), Rep. Mayes Middleton ($20K), Defend Texas Liberty PAC ($14K), The Woodlands executive Anthony George ($10K), Huntsville retirees Charles and Jeanine Tompkins ($10K combined) and College Station executive Ken Watford ($10K).

HD17 open (Safe R): Stan Gerdes (R) out-raised Paul Pape (R), $213K to $32K, and outspent him, $245K to $138K. Gerdes’s largest contributors included Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($50K), Texans for Responsible Government PAC ($10K), Energy Transfer Partners Texas PAC ($9K) and Austin lobbyist Ron Lewis ($7.5K). Pape’s largest contributor was Texas Farm Bureau AGFUND ($26K).

HD19 open (Safe R): Ellen Troxclair (R) out-raised Justin Berry, $265K to $165K, and outspent him, $465K to $153K. She holds a $172K to $46K advantage in cash on hand. Troxclair’s largest contributors included Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($60K) and its CEO Richard Weekley ($25K), Austin software executive Joe Liemandt ($52K), Austin energy executive Bryan Sheffield ($25K), Austin homebuilder David Dalgleish ($10K) and Texas Assoc. of Realtors TREPAC ($10K).

Berry’s largest contributors were Protect and Serve Texas PAC ($43K), Austin Police Assoc. PAC ($25K) and Charles Butt Public Education PAC ($25K).

HD23 open (Likely R): Terri Leo-Wilson (R) out-raised Patrick Gurski (R), $585K to $295K, solely because of support from Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC, which supplied nearly 94% of her contribution total. Gurski narrowly outspent her, $99K to $82K, but much of TLR’s support essentially has the effect of campaign spending.

Gurski’s largest contributors were Associated Republicans of Texas PAC ($131K), Texans for Responsible Government PAC ($25), Galveston County for Conservative Values PAC ($17K), Galveston Co. Comm. Darrell Apffel’s campaign ($13K) and Galveston Co. Comm. Joe Giusti’s campaign ($13K). Wilson-Leo’s largest contributors were Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($548K), Texas Right to Life PAC ($10K) and Defend Texas Liberty PAC ($7K).

HD37 open (Lean D): Luis Villarreal Jr. (D) narrowly out-raised Ruben Cortez (D), $55K to $53K, and outspent him, $112K to $45K.

HD52 open (Lean R): Pat McGuinness (R), who has largely self-funded his campaign, raised $13K and spent $233K. Caroline Harris’s (R) report was not yet available.

HD60 (Safe R): Rep. Glenn Rogers (R-Graford) raised $751K and spent $523K. Mike Olcott’s (R) report was not yet available. Roger’s largest contributors included Speaker Dade Phelan’s campaign ($250K), Texas Assoc. of Realtors TREPAC ($62K), Texas House Republican Caucus PAC ($35K), Aledo realtor Jimmy Martin ($35K), Charles Butt Public Education PAC ($25K), Texas Farm Bureau AGFUND ($25K), Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($20K), Veterinarian PAC ($20K), Texas Alliance for Life PAC ($16K) and Associated Republicans of Texas PAC ($15K).

HD61 open (Likely R): Frederick Frazier (R) out-raised Paul Chabot (R), $275K to $31K, and outspent him, $208K to $88K. Frazier’s largest contributors included Associated Republicans of Texas PAC ($50K), Speaker Dade Phelan’s campaign ($36K), Texans for Responsible Government PAC ($15K), Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($12.5K) and Charles Butt Public Education PAC ($10K).

HD63 open (Likely R): Ben Bumgarner (R) narrowly out-raised Jeff Younger (R), $268K to $240K, and outspent him, $248K to $79K. Bumgarner’s largest contributors included Associated Republicans of Texas PAC ($80K), Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($66K), Speaker Dade Phelan’s campaign ($63K) and Texas Sands PAC ($10K). Younger’s largest contributors were Defend Texas Liberty PAC ($147K), Conservative Action for Texas PAC ($53K), former Sen. Don Huffines ($10K) and Texas Right to Life PAC ($10K).

HD70 open (Toss Up): Jamee Jolly (R) out-raised the largely self-funded Eric Bowlin (R), $273K to $18K, but was outspent, $152K to $96K. On the Democratic side, Cassandra Garcia Hernandez out-raised Miheala Plesa, $118K to $29K, and outspent her, $114K to $67K.

HD73 open (Safe R): Barron Casteel (R) out-raised Carrie Isaac, $422K to $310K, and outspent her, $367K to $256K. Casteel’s largest contributors included Speaker Dade Phelan’s campaign ($100K), Associated Republicans of Texas PAC ($25K), Charles Butt Public Education PAC ($25K), Texans for Responsible Government PAC ($25K), New Braunfels oil and gas executive Josh Price ($20K), New Braunfels executive John Weisman ($20K) and Texas Assoc. of Realtors TREPAC ($17K).

Isaac’s largest contributors were Rep. Mayes Middleton ($100K), Conservatives for Law Enforcement & Border Security PAC ($65K), Canyon Lake retiree Debbie Asbury ($36K), Dripping Springs retiree Robert Seale ($20K), Midland oil and gas executives Don and Jeff Sparks ($20K combined) and College Station conservative activist Kathaleen Wall ($15K).

HD76 open (Likely D): Suleman Lalani (D) out-raised Vanesia Johnson, $91K to $3K, and outspent her, $103K to $3K.

HD84 open (Likely R): Carl Tepper out-raised David Glasheen, $295K to $11K, but the largely self-funded Glasheen vastly outspent Tepper, $924K to $67K. Glasheen loaned himself another $950K, bringing his outstanding loan principal to $1.65M. Tepper’s largest contributors were Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($237K) and Texans for Responsible Government PAC ($13K).

HD85 (Safe R): Rep. Phil Stephenson (R-Wharton) raised just $54K – a fraction of the amounts raised by the three other incumbents facing runoffs – and spent $64K. Challenger Stan Kitzman (R) raised $52K and spent $46K.

Stephenson’s largest contributor was Texas House Republican Caucus PAC ($35K). Kitzman’s largest contributors were Houston energy executive Jeffery Hildebrand ($10K), Houston developer Steven Alvis ($5K) and Bellville executive Charles Scianna Jr. ($5K).

Stephenson received, by far, the least amount of support from House leadership and heavy-hitting Republican PACS of any incumbent and was well behind many open-seat candidates. He received no contributions from House colleagues during the period. By contrast, Rep. Stephanie Klick (R-Fort Worth) received $180K from her colleagues not named Phelan and $235K from the Speaker’s campaign account. Rep. Kyle Kacal (R-College Station) received $31K from members not named Phelan and $33K from his campaign. Rep. Glenn Rogers (R-Graford) received $20K from members not named Phelan and $250K from the Speaker.

HD91 (Likely R): Rep. Stephanie Klick (R-Fort Worth) out-raised challenger David Lowe, $955K to $263K, and outspent him, $472K to $53K. She holds a $128K to $6K advantage in cash on hand.

Klick’s largest contributors for the period included Speaker Dade Phelan’s campaign ($235K), Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($200K), Texas Alliance for Life PAC ($37K), Rep. Greg Bonnen’s campaign ($35K), Rep. Dustin Burrow’s campaign ($35K), Texas House Republican Caucus PAC ($35K), Protect and Serve Texas PAC ($29K), Texans for Responsible Government PAC ($25K), Texas Nurse Practitioners PAC ($25K), Texas Assoc. of Realtors TREPAC ($20K) and Rep. Gary Gates’s campaign ($15K). Klick received $180K from her colleagues’ campaign funds not including Phelan’s campaign, which added $235K to that total.

Lowe’s largest contributors were Defend Texas Liberty PAC ($165K) and Conservative Action for Texas PAC ($53K). Combined they accounted for 83% of Lowe’s contribution total.

HD93 (Likely R): Laura Hill (R) out-raised Nate Schatzline (R), $404K to $312K, and outspent him, $220K to $124K. Hill’s largest contributors were Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($173K), Associated Republicans of Texas PAC ($68K), Speaker Dade Phelan’s campaign ($37K), Argyle retirees Wallace and Margaret Downey ($35K combined), Texas Assoc. of Realtors TREPAC ($25K) and Texans for Responsible Government PAC ($10K).

Schatzline’s largest contributors were Defend Texas Liberty PAC ($165K), Conservative Action for Texas PAC ($32K), Schatzline family members ($25K combined), Rep. Mayes Middleton ($10K), Haslet franchise owner Thomas Hardeman ($10K) and Texas Right to Life PAC ($10K).

HD100 open (Safe D): Venton Jones raised $110K and spent $101K. The report from Sandra Crenshaw (D) was not yet available. Through the primary, she raised $5K and spent less than that.

HD114 open (Safe D): Alexandra Guio (D) out-raised former Rep. John Bryant (D-Dallas), $55K to $33K, but was narrowly outspent, $54K to $46K. Over the election cycle, Guio and Bryant have each raised $124K.

HD122 open (Likely R): Elisa Chan (R) out-raised Mark Dorazio (R), $168K to $110K, and outspent him, $564K to $300K. Chan’s largest contributors for the period were Associated Republicans of Texas PAC ($25K), Speaker Dade Phelan’s campaign ($50K), Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($20K), Texans for Responsible Government PAC ($10K). Chan also loaned her campaign an additional $400K, bringing her total outstanding loan balance to $1.6M.

Dorazio’s largest contributors were Boerne retiree Robert Bruce ($12K), Rep. Mayes Middleton ($10K) and Defend Texas Libety PAC ($8.5K). Dorazio loaned his campaign another $200K, bringing his outstanding loan principal to $500K.

HD133 open (Likely R): Mano DeAyala (R) out-raised Shelly Barineau (R), $464K to $292K, and outspent her, $480K to $277K. DeAyala’s largest contributors were Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC ($150K), Associated Republicans of Texas PAC ($42K), Houston retiree David Light III ($25K), Houston executive Alan Hassenflu ($15K), Houston homebuilder Michael Moody ($15K) and Houston homebuilder Richard Weekley ($15K).

Barineau’s largest contributors were Houston retiree Pamela Barineau ($50K), Kenney retiree Dianne Holmes ($40K) Houston nonprofit executive Melinda Hilderbrand ($10K), Houston realtor Allen Crosswell ($10K), Houston retiree Amy Huggins ($10K) and Rep. Mayes Middleton ($10K).

🎙️We Have a Podcast! 🎙️

Bills and Business is your go-to podcast for conversations related to Texas legislation and business. Hosted by Laura Carr, Co-Founder of USLege—an AI-driven legislative tracking software—we bring you in-depth analysis on economic trends, impactful legislation, and key developments shaping Texas business.

Subscribe on Youtube and Spotify for weekly episodes!

🔍 USLege - The Only AI-First Political Tracking Solution ✨

USLege helps you track legislation and find what you need faster from bills, committee hearings, floor debates, and state agency meetings faster.

Say goodbye to tedious tasks!

You can follow USLege on LinkedIn, Facebook, and X.

🤝 Texas Association of Business 📈

Texas Association of Business (TAB) is the Texas State Chamber, representing companies of every size and industry. TAB’s purpose is to champion the best business climate in the world, unleashing the power of free enterprise to enhance lives for generations.

You can follow TAB on LinkedIn, Facebook, and X.

Table of Content
  1. 01 First
Trusted by Government Affairs Professionals and Corporate Policy Teams
Blog & Articles

Read more news

How to Choose the Best Legislative Tracking Software for Your Organization
This is some text inside of a div block.

In today’s fast-paced policy environment, staying informed is a constant challenge. Bills, hearings, and regulatory updates move quickly across jurisdictions, creating risks for organizations that rely on timely information, including the risk of missing important information when relying on manual processes. Choosing the best legislative tracking software is one of the most effective ways to manage legislative and regulatory tracking efficiently, minimize missed opportunities, and strengthen decision-making.

This article walks you through how to evaluate legislative and regulatory tools, compare coverage and capabilities, and understand which features help government affairs professionals and public affairs teams stay informed and a step ahead of rapid change. You’ll learn how to assess software platforms, review vendor performance, and apply a clear framework to guide your organization’s choice.

If you’re exploring modern solutions for policy monitoring, visit the best legislative tracking software to see how advanced systems help professionals track activity and analyze critical information across multiple jurisdictions.

Why Legislative Tracking Software Matters

Every legislative session brings thousands of new bills and hearings across the federal government, state legislatures, and local governments. For government affairs teams and law firms that must monitor state legislation or track regulations, the pace of change can be overwhelming.

Without digital platforms, staff may spend hours each day manually searching databases, reading committee reports, and updating spreadsheets. That process isn’t just inefficient—it’s risky. Missing one act or amendment could affect compliance, advocacy strategy, or even public reputation. Relying on manual tracking increases the chance of overlooking important details in legislative information, which can lead to missing critical updates or changes.

The Challenge of Volume and Velocity

  • Legislative and regulatory tracking spans bills, hearings, amendments, and regulations that appear daily.
  • Strategic decisions depend on access to verified data and real-time alerts.
  • Regulatory developments from government agencies can impact clients and advocacy groups instantly.

The Payoff

Automated tracking saves time, reduces human error, and delivers actionable insights faster. Teams can filter results, share updates, and focus their attention where it matters most—on influencing policy and shaping outcomes.

Key Features and Capabilities to Look For

Choosing the right tracking platform starts with understanding what differentiates effective tools from simple alert systems. Below are core features to evaluate before purchasing or implementing any solution.

Coverage Across Jurisdictions

The best systems provide a broad jurisdictional reach—from federal legislation to state legislative hearings and local government acts. Before committing, confirm whether the platform includes:

  • Federal and state legislation: Bills, amendments, regulations, hearings, and newly introduced bills, with Congress as a key source for federal legislative tracking.
  • Regulatory activity: Notices from agencies and committees.
  • Comprehensive data sources: Congressional records, local archives, and state portals.

Understanding the dynamic nature of Capitol Hill is crucial, as legislative activity and staff turnover at the federal level can significantly impact advocacy strategies and tracking efforts.

If your team must monitor state legislation, check that the vendor’s coverage includes smaller states and municipalities that frequently pass niche regulations.

Real Time Alerts and Notifications

Fast updates are critical for professionals who manage compliance or advocacy campaigns. Strong systems offer:

  • Instant email alerts for bill introductions, amendments, or new hearings.
  • Custom filters for topics, sponsors, committees, or jurisdictions.
  • Real-time dashboards showing where legislation is moving next.
  • Collaboration tools so teams can assign follow-up actions or comments.

With real-time alerts, government affairs professionals and policy experts can respond before deadlines pass—ensuring that organizations stay ahead and fully informed.

Analytics, Reporting, and Insight Generation

Good tracking isn’t just about collecting raw data. It’s about turning that data into useful analysis. A well-built platform helps users:

  • Create trend dashboards showing activity by topic, legislator, or region.
  • Generate reports to brief clients, executives, or advocacy groups.
  • Use artificial intelligence to compare bills, predict movement, or analyze outcomes.
  • Access historical data for longitudinal analysis.

By combining analytics with visualization tools, organizations gain the context needed to make strategic decisions quickly.

Artificial Intelligence in Legislative Tracking

Artificial intelligence transforms how government affairs professionals and government relations teams approach legislative tracking. By harnessing AI, organizations can analyze massive volumes of legislative and regulatory data in real time, ensuring that no critical bill or regulation goes unnoticed. AI-powered tools can automatically identify and prioritize bills that align with an organization’s advocacy goals, generate personalized bill summaries, and even predict the likelihood of legislative movement—all with minimal manual intervention.

For government relations professionals, this means less time spent sifting through raw data and more time focusing on strategy, stakeholder engagement, and influencing policy outcomes. AI-driven platforms can scan every legislative chamber, flagging new bills and regulations that matter most to your organization. These actionable insights empower teams to stay ahead of policy developments, respond quickly to emerging issues, and confidently make strategic decisions. As artificial intelligence continues to evolve, it will play an increasingly vital role in helping professionals track legislation, analyze regulatory trends, and drive effective advocacy across all levels of government.

Ease of Use and Vendor Support

Complex systems often fail because users find them hard to operate. When evaluating tracking software, consider:

  • Intuitive search functions and clear navigation.
  • Vendor training, documentation, and help-desk responsiveness.
  • Implementation timelines and onboarding resources.
  • Integration options with CRM, compliance, or reporting platforms.

The easier the interface, the more likely professionals across departments—legal, advocacy, and communications—will actually use it.

Security and Data Protection

When it comes to legislative tracking, security and data protection are non-negotiable for government affairs professionals and organizations. The sensitive nature of legislative and regulatory data—combined with the need for accurate, up-to-date information—means that robust security measures are essential. Leading legislative tracking platforms employ advanced encryption, secure servers, and strict access controls to ensure that only authorized users can access critical information.

In addition, reputable platforms adhere to industry best practices and compliance standards, safeguarding client data from unauthorized access or breaches. This commitment to security allows government relations professionals to focus on their core strategy and advocacy efforts, knowing that their data is protected at every step. By selecting a platform with proven security protocols, organizations can confidently manage their legislative tracking activities and maintain the trust of stakeholders, clients, and team members.

Integration with Other Tools

For government affairs professionals, efficiency and collaboration are key to successful advocacy. That’s why seamless integration between legislative tracking platforms and other essential tools—such as CRM systems, email clients, and social media monitoring software—is so valuable. Integrated platforms enable government relations professionals to track bills, monitor legislator interactions, and analyze advocacy campaigns all in one place, reducing manual data entry and streamlining workflows.

By connecting legislative tracking with CRM systems, organizations can maintain a comprehensive record of stakeholder engagement, track the progress of key bills, and measure the impact of their advocacy efforts. Integration with communication tools also ensures that teams can quickly share updates, assign tasks, and coordinate responses to legislative developments. Ultimately, these integrations help government affairs teams stay ahead of policy changes, maximize efficiency, and deliver more effective results for their organizations and clients.

Cost, Scalability, and ROI

Pricing varies widely across platforms. Some charge by user, others by jurisdiction. Evaluate:

  • Scalability: Can you expand access as new teams join?
  • Hidden costs: Extra fees for integrations or data exports.
  • ROI: Measure efficiency gains, reduced research hours, and improved regulatory compliance.

The right investment pays for itself through faster tracking, stronger insight, and better policy outcomes.

Building Your Decision-Making Checklist

A structured checklist helps teams evaluate multiple vendors objectively. Consider the following steps:

  1. Define scope: Identify which government levels—federal, state, local—your organization must monitor.
  2. Map stakeholders: Determine which departments, clients, professionals, or legislators need access to legislative tracking information.
  3. Create a scoring system: Rate vendors on coverage, alerts, analytics, ease of use, and cost.
  4. Request demos: Ask vendors to show how their tools track legislation and deliver reports.
  5. Review accuracy: Compare automated alerts to official legislative portals to confirm reliability.
  6. Pilot the system: Run a short test during a legislative session to evaluate performance.

This structured review allows government relations professionals and policy experts to make choices based on measurable evidence, not sales claims.

Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

Even sophisticated organizations can stumble during implementation. Watch for these frequent errors:

  • Assuming full coverage: Some systems exclude local governments or agency regulations. This can result in missing important government actions, leaving you unaware of key legislative or regulatory developments.
  • Overloading users: Too many irrelevant alerts lead to fatigue.
  • Ignoring integration: Platforms that don’t connect to existing tools reduce efficiency.
  • Underestimating training: Teams may resist new systems without clear onboarding.
  • Skipping metrics: Without KPIs, you can’t analyze ROI or improvement.

Avoiding these issues keeps your strategy grounded in real performance data.

Implementation Best Practices and Maximizing Value

Rolling out a new tracking platform works best when everyone understands the process. Follow these steps:

  • Stakeholder alignment: Engage government affairs, legal, and communications teams early.
  • Define taxonomy: Standardize issue tags, committees, and jurisdiction names.
  • Workflow mapping: Assign ownership for monitoring, escalation, and communication.
  • Training: Offer live sessions and short guides to reinforce adoption.
  • Continuous review: Revisit settings each quarter to refine alerts and search filters.

As policy cycles shift, ongoing optimization ensures that your system remains accurate, relevant, and responsive to regulatory developments.

For additional insight on how legislative and regulatory tools operate, review the NCSL’s bill tracking overview, which explains how professionals track state legislation effectively.

Future of Legislative Tracking

The future of legislative tracking is bright, with rapid advancements in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and data analytics reshaping how government affairs professionals and organizations monitor and influence policy. As the demand for real-time, data-driven insights grows, legislative tracking tools will become even more sophisticated—offering predictive analytics, automated reporting, and deeper integration with other advocacy platforms.

We can expect to see greater adoption of cloud-based solutions, enhanced security features, and more intuitive user interfaces that make it easier for government relations professionals to access and analyze critical information. The integration of legislative tracking with CRM, communication, and analytics tools will provide a unified view of advocacy efforts, enabling teams to coordinate strategy and engage stakeholders more effectively.

As the policy landscape evolves, staying ahead of legislative and regulatory developments will be essential for organizations seeking to influence legislation and achieve their advocacy goals. By embracing the latest technologies and innovations, government affairs professionals can ensure they remain agile, informed, and ready to drive meaningful impact in an ever-changing environment.

Texas Political Spotlight
This is some text inside of a div block.

Welcome back, friends

Texas voters approved one of the largest property tax relief packages in state history on Tuesday, raising the homestead exemption to $140,000 and granting new tax breaks for seniors, people with disabilities, and small businesses. In Austin, residents rejected Proposition Q, a plan to fund public safety, homelessness programs, and city facility initiatives through a property tax hike, forcing city leaders to rework the budget and brace for service cuts. Meanwhile, Bexar County voters narrowly passed Propositions A and B, greenlighting up to $311 million in tourism-funded support for a new downtown Spurs arena and upgrades to the Freeman Coliseum grounds.

We hope you enjoyed today’s read!

Stay connected with TXLege News on X and LinkedIn!

Texas Political Spotlight
This is some text inside of a div block.

Welcome back friends,

Former Vice President Dick Cheney, one of the most influential and controversial figures in modern American politics, has died at 84, remembered by former President George W. Bush as a “patriot” whose intellect and conviction shaped decades of U.S. policy. In Texas, the Education Agency announced a sweeping takeover of Fort Worth ISD, the state’s second-largest intervention, citing years of academic underperformance and plans to install new local managers. And in Washington, a United Airlines flight was evacuated after a bomb threat, prompting an FBI investigation that later found no explosives, allowing operations to resume safely.

We hope you enjoyed today’s read!

Stay connected with TXLege News on X and LinkedIn!