2025 · Regular session · Senate bill
SB710
SB710 lets a city authorize separate public online message boards for its boards, commissions and similar entities, in addition to the city’s own message board.
Official caption: Relating to the establishment and use of a written electronic communications system accessible to the public by certain municipal entities.
Official report lists Senate author(s): Eckhardt. 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.
- SB710 lets a city authorize separate public online message boards for its boards, commissions and similar entities, in addition to the city’s own message board.
- This is an option for public written discussion, not permission to conduct business secretly or vote online through posts.
- Qualifying written exchanges about the body’s public business are not meetings or deliberations under the Open Meetings Act.
What does it do?
SB710 lets a city authorize separate public online message boards for its boards, commissions and similar entities, in addition to the city’s own message board. Authorization must be by ordinance or resolution, may last no more than two years at a time, may be renewed repeatedly, and may be withdrawn at any time. The city must require a municipal employee to monitor compliance. Signed June 20, 2025, the act took effect September 1, 2025. New Section 551.0061 and effective date; Official history.
This is an option for public written discussion, not permission to conduct business secretly or vote online through posts. The existing safeguards still apply: communications must be viewable and searchable by the public, displayed in real time and left online for at least 30 days. The government must own or control the system and prominently link it within one click of its main webpage. Only members and specifically authorized staff may post; staff posts must identify the staff member’s name and title. Posts removed after at least 30 days must be retained for six years and remain subject to public-information disclosure. Required compliance with Section 551.006; Full incorporated safeguards.
Qualifying written exchanges about the body’s public business are not meetings or deliberations under the Open Meetings Act. But a body cannot use posts to vote or take an action that must occur at a meeting, and no post counts as an action of the body. Public access here means access to view and search the discussion, not a general right for everyone to post. Section 551.006(a), (c) and (e).
What changed along the way?
The introduced and Senate-passed bill covered a narrower class of commissions or entities organized under the municipal zoning subchapter. The House committee substitute expanded this to each municipal board, commission or similar entity. The two-year authorization limit, renewal and withdrawal powers, existing safeguards and employee-monitoring requirement remained. The House version matches the enrolled text; the Senate concurred May 30. Introduced bill; Senate-passed bill; House substitute; Enrolled law; Concurrence history.
The amendment index lists no separate floor amendments. The material change was the House committee substitute, not a separately listed floor proposal. The act also adds an express exception to the existing one-message-board limit so the additional municipal-entity boards can operate under these conditions. Amendment index; All versions; Section 1.
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?
Municipal boards gain another way to exchange information openly between meetings, and residents may gain searchable access to those discussions. Cities that choose to use it must provide administration, monitoring and record retention. The law does not require every city to create such a system and does not guarantee more participation or better decisions. Optional authority and mandatory safeguards; Access, retention and no-voting rules.
The May 24 House-substitute fiscal note anticipates no state fiscal impact and no significant local-government fiscal impact. It does not give a dollar estimate for an individual city’s software or employee time. The March 15 introduced-bill note reaches the same overall fiscal conclusions. Latest fiscal note; Earlier fiscal note.
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.
