← Back to bills and search results
2025 · Regular session · House bill
HB4158
HB4158 repeals the Texana Groundwater Conservation District's special prohibition on paying its directors, effective September 1, 2025.
Official caption: Relating to the compensation of the directors of the Texana Groundwater Conservation District.
Official report lists House author(s): Louderback. 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.
- HB4158 repeals the Texana Groundwater Conservation District's special prohibition on paying its directors, effective September 1, 2025.
- The district is subject to general groundwater-district law through Section 8857.101.
- The bill therefore permits compensation under existing general-law limits; it does not itself award every director a $9,000 salary or document that the board has approved any particular payment.
What does it do?
HB4158 repeals the Texana Groundwater Conservation District’s special prohibition on paying its directors, effective September 1, 2025. The repealed Section 8857.056 had barred salary or other compensation while allowing reimbursement of actual meeting expenses at Jackson County employee rates.
The district is subject to general groundwater-district law through Section 8857.101. Without that special prohibition, Water Code Section 36.060 supplies the general fees-of-office rules: up to $250 for a day actually spent performing director duties, capped at $9,000 a year, plus actual reasonable and necessary district-business expenses. Directors must file verified statements of service days and duties. A board resolution is required to authorize higher fees when applying that section produces an increase.
The bill therefore permits compensation under existing general-law limits; it does not itself award every director a $9,000 salary or document that the board has approved any particular payment.
What changed along the way?
The entire operative change is the repeal, followed by the effective-date provision. The introduced text, House committee report, engrossed text, Senate committee printing and enrolled text are substantively identical. The amendment index lists no amendments. The official history records the governor’s June 20 signature.
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?
Directors may be compensated for documented district work rather than serving without pay. That could help offset the time commitment, while any approved payments become district expenses. Whether payments actually increase depends on the board’s decisions and qualifying service, not simply passage of the bill.
The latest fiscal note anticipated no fiscal implication for the state and no significant fiscal implication for local governments. It does not mean the district is forbidden to incur compensation costs.
Review boundary: This explains the statutory change and general-law limits, not the district’s later compensation resolutions or actual payroll.
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.
