← Back to bills and search results
2025 · Regular session · House bill
HB210
HB210 creates a criminal offense for a vendor bidding on or receiving a school-district or open-enrollment charter-school contract when specified financial, family or gift-related conditions involving a board member exist.
Official caption: Relating to contracting with a school district or open-enrollment charter school by a vendor with whom a member of the board of trustees or governing body of the district or school or a related individual has certain business interests; creating a criminal offense.
Official report lists House author(s): Guillen, Lopez, Janie, Rodríguez Ramos. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.
Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.
Bill highlights
Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.
- HB210 creates a criminal offense for a vendor bidding on or receiving a school-district or open-enrollment charter-school contract when specified financial, family or gift-related conditions involving a board member exist.
- The covered conditions are that a board member has a substantial interest in the vendor or a subcontractor hired by a vendor; is related “in the second degree” by blood or marriage, as determined under Government Code Chapter 573, to someone with a substantial interest in the vendor; or “has received or has been promised a gift or in-kind services with a value of more than $250.” The gift clause is stated broadly and does not itself identify the giver or a time window.
- A substantial interest means ownership of more than 10% of voting interests or a direct or indirect participating interest in more than 10% of profits, proceeds or capital gains, with or without voting rights.
- “Vendor” includes companies, individuals, contractors, subcontractors and professional-service providers entering the listed kinds of goods-or-services arrangements, including contracts, memoranda of understanding, interlocal agreements, fee schedules and retainers.
- The act does not expressly specify a culpable mental state.
What does it do?
HB210 creates a criminal offense for a vendor bidding on or receiving a school-district or open-enrollment charter-school contract when specified financial, family or gift-related conditions involving a board member exist. It took effect September 1, 2025. The new section places the offense on the vendor; it is not simply a new disclosure form or a rule saying the board member may abstain from voting. Final act
The covered conditions are that a board member has a substantial interest in the vendor or a subcontractor hired by a vendor; is related “in the second degree” by blood or marriage, as determined under Government Code Chapter 573, to someone with a substantial interest in the vendor; or “has received or has been promised a gift or in-kind services with a value of more than $250.” The gift clause is stated broadly and does not itself identify the giver or a time window. This summary does not invent exceptions or resolve that wording by treating every unrelated gift as a proven crime. Section 11.067(b)
A substantial interest means ownership of more than 10% of voting interests or a direct or indirect participating interest in more than 10% of profits, proceeds or capital gains, with or without voting rights. Exactly 10% is not “more than 10%.” The family-relationship provision uses a legal degree calculation, not a general ban covering every relative: for example, siblings and grandparents/grandchildren are second-degree blood relatives under Chapter 573. Section 11.067(c) · Relationship rules
“Vendor” includes companies, individuals, contractors, subcontractors and professional-service providers entering the listed kinds of goods-or-services arrangements, including contracts, memoranda of understanding, interlocal agreements, fee schedules and retainers. A first offense is a Class C misdemeanor; a second is Class B, a third Class A, and a fourth or later offense a state jail felony. Any offense is a state jail felony if the vendor directly or through a third party compensates the board member with money, gifts or in-kind services in exchange for the school entering the contract. That exchange-for-contract provision is distinct from the separate gift-over-$250 clause. Section 11.067(a), (d) and (e)
The act does not expressly specify a culpable mental state. Texas’s general criminal-law rule normally still requires one unless the offense plainly dispenses with it. The text should therefore not be summarized as automatic conviction whenever a vendor discovers a relationship after the fact. Penal Code Section 6.02
What changed along the way?
The filed bill covered school districts, substantial interests in the vendor and the stated family relationship. It already proposed escalating offense grades and a state jail felony when the vendor directly compensated a trustee in exchange for the contract. Filed text
The House committee substitute added open-enrollment charter schools and their governing bodies; defined vendors and covered contracting instruments; added board-member interests in a vendor’s subcontractor; added the gift-or-in-kind-services-over-$250 clause; and expanded the exchange-for-contract felony provision to indirect compensation through third parties and expressly to money, gifts and in-kind services. The more-than-10% thresholds and offense-grade progression remained. House substitute
The House-passed text, Senate committee report and enrolled act retain that substitute’s substantive provisions. The amendment index lists no separate floor amendments. The House passed the bill April 16 by 146–0, with one present but not voting; the Senate passed it May 16 by 31–0. The governor signed it May 29. House-passed text · Senate report · Amendment index · Final certificates · Official history
For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.
Official bill versions
Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.
Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?
Schools, taxpayers and competing vendors could benefit if the criminal restrictions deter conflicted contracting or payments for contracts. Vendors face new criminal exposure and may need to examine ownership, subcontracting and board-member relationships before bidding. The law does not quantify reduced favoritism, improved prices or compliance costs. Final act
Enforcement can require investigation, prosecution, supervision or confinement resources. The Legislative Budget Board anticipated no significant state fiscal implication, no significant impact on state correctional populations or resources, and no significant local enforcement-related fiscal impact. Any state revenue effect would depend on offenses and associated court costs. These estimates do not remove the potentially serious consequences for an individual vendor or establish how often the new offense will be charged. Latest posted fiscal note, May 6
Official sources
- Bill history and latest recorded action
- Bill versions, analyses and fiscal notes
- Action history and votes
- Amendment index
Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.