Texas House of Representatives. Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011.

JOE STRAUS: The House will come to order. Members, please register. Have all members registered? The quorum is present. The House and gallery, please rise for the invocation. And the Chair recognizes Representative Harper-Brown to introduce our Pastor of the Day. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Thank you, Mr. speaker. Members, I want to introduce to you Ben Dailey, the lead pastor at Calvary Church in Irving. His ministry approach has allowed for record growth at Calvary. He has served as a church planter, a ministry consultant and as Sr. Pastor. He's been married to his wife Kim for 17 years, and has two children; a daughter, Kyla, and a son, Kade. Please join me in welcoming Pastor Ben Dailey.

PASTOR BEN DAILEY: Let us pray. Father God, we bow humbly before you to thank you for the privilege and the purpose of this occasion. We thank you for the people who make the State of Texas so great. We thank you for the the public servants who provide sterling leadership, which has kept this state strong. We thank you for the peace in this state and this country, which we have enjoyed for many years. We thank you for the prosperity which are has enabled us to live, relaxed and comfortable lives. God, we are grateful. I pray today that you will give wisdom to our leaders so that their decisions will be in harmony with your divine design. Give understanding and patience to the people of Texas so that they may live quiet and peaceful lives. Give protection to our police, firefighters, and freedom fighters around the world. God, I thank you for the protection our special ops teams had this past weekend as they ended the worldwide manhunt of Osama Bin Laden. God, give us thankful hearts for our many blessings that you have given us. Give health and wholeness to those in our state who suffer from sickness and infirmity and shortage and lack. God, would you forgive us of our pride, prejudice, intolerance, bigotry and unbelief; and give us an attitude of gratitude, love, forgiveness and acceptance. God, please bless our government, our governor, our state legislature with vision, with passion for the future. Bless our school system with effective strategies for educating our children. Bless our business community with success and profitability. God, bless our churches with spiritual fire and fervor as they minister hope to so many people. And, god, would you please bless our Dallas Cowboys with another Superbowl championship. And we thank you in the authority and awesome name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Aycock to lead us in the Pledge.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Members and honored guests, please join me in the pledge to our flag.

(Pledge of Allegiance to the United States and Texas flags.)

JOE STRAUS: The Chair introduces Representative Hardcastle to introduce our Doctor of the Day.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, it is my pleasure this morning for any of you that get to feeling ill today, to introduce Dr. Max Latham, who came all the way from Bowie, Texas, which is Montague County; which, as of the last map, I get to keep. He's going to be our Doctor of the Day today. He operates in Clay, Montague and Wise County Medical Society and a graduate of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School in Dallas. Please, help me welcome him and his wife here today to take care of our ills.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Aycock moves to suspend the reading and referral of bills until the end of today's business. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Harper-Brown for a motion. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Mr. Sp eaker, members, I'd like to suspend all necessary rules to bring up House Resolution 1323.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Resolution 1323.

CLERK: HR1323 by Harper-Brown. WHEREAS, The girls' basketball team of MacArthur High School in Irving reached the ultimate level of achievement by claiming the University Interscholastic League Class 5A state championship with a victory in the title game on March 5, 2011; and WHEREAS, Playing the talented team from Georgetown High School in the state tournament finals at the Frank Erwin Center in Austin, the Lady Cardinals built a 17-point halftime lead and went on to win 74-51; the victory gave MacArthur High its first team sport state championship and capped a 2010-2011 season that saw the team win 37 of its 39 contests; and WHEREAS, Alexis Jones was named the most valuable player of the state tournament, while Karmyn Jackson and Ayriel Anderson were named to the all-tournament team; in addition, Ms. Jones received the Gatorade Texas Girls Basketball Player of the Year honor and the Dallas Morning News all-area basketball MVP award, while Ms. Jackson was a nominee for the McDonald's All-American High School Basketball Team; and WHEREAS, The Lady Cardinals also received valuable contributions throughout the year from the other members of the roster: Ivory Coleman, Demetria Foreman, Monique Jackson, Tiffini Wilson, Khoria Newman, Cierra Robinson, Desiree Smith, and Tory Jacobs; and WHEREAS, During the state tournament, head coach Suzie Oelschlegel was honored with a lifetime achievement award for her 31 years of coaching and her more than 600 career victories; she was also named the All-Area Coach of the Year for 2010-2011 by the Dallas Morning News; and WHEREAS, The MacArthur athletes received additional guidance From assistant coaches Kim Nance, Jennifer Smith, and Joe Shelley And benefited from the work of statistician Wally Banks, trainers Adrianna Perry and Matthew Reames, and team managers D'Adra Ollis Lucy Partida, Brianna James, and Destiny Newsome; the MacArthur High School principal is Cynthia Bean and the campus coordinator is Brian Basil, while leadership on the district level is provided by Irving ISD athletic director Joe Barnett and superintendent Dana Bedden; and WHEREAS, Winning a state championship represents the Culmination of countless hours of hard work and an enduring Commitment to excellence, and these talented student-athletes may Take justifiable pride in this accomplishment; now, therefore, be It RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives of the 82nd Texas Legislature hereby congratulate the MacArthur High School girls'. Basketball team on winning the UIL Class 5A state championship and Extend to the team's players, coaches, and staff sincere best Wishes for continued success; and, be it further RESOLVED, That an official copy of this resolution be Prepared for the Lady Cardinals as an expression of high regard by The Texas House of Representatives.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Harper-Brown. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative McClendon moves to add all members' names. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Harper-Brown. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I want to be sure that your all paying attention to this, because I know how much we enjoy the accomplishments of our students here in the State of Texas. I'm honored, very honored today to introduce you to the MacArthur High School Girls' Basketball Team, the 5A State Champions for 2011. The team worked hard all season, and on March 5th they defeated Georgetown High School to bring home the State Championship Title. Joining us on the dias this morning is Ariel Anderson, a member of the All Tournament Team. Carmen Jackson, a member of the All Tournament Team and a nominee for the McDonalds All American High School Basketball Team. Alexis Jones, the Most Valuable Player of the State Tournament and a winner of the Gatorade Texas Basketball Player of the Year honor, and the Dallas Morning News All Area Basketball Most Valuable Player award. Korea Newman, another strong member of the team. And Head Coach Suzy (inaudible), who is also, members, the winner of the 2011 UIL Lifetime Achievement Award for her outstanding 31 years of coaching and her more than 600 career victories. Members, we have the rest of the basketball team up in the gallery. If you-all would please stand? And we also have the MacArthur principal, Cynthia Bean. Please stand and be recognized. Winning the State Championship represents the culmination of countless hours of hard work and dedication, and these athletes should take pride in their accomplishments. Members, please join me in welcoming the MacArthur High School Girls' Basketball Team, 5A State Champions, to the State Capitol this morning.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Patrick.

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: Mr. Speaker , members, I'd like to suspend all neccesary rules to take up and consider House Resolution 1662.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out the following resolution. The clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HR1662 by Patrick. Recognizing the cadets of the Texas Armed Services Scholarship Program.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Patrick.

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: Mr. Speaker , members, today we are honoring the cadets of the Texas Armed Services Scholarship Program who are in the gallery with us. I'd like to ask them to rise, as I read some remarks. Welcome, we're all glad that you're here at the Texas House with us. And I want you-all to know that these young Texans have dedicated themselves to serving their fellow citizens, while working toward their professional goals. Currently, the Texas Armed Services Scholarship Program encourages students to participate in ROTC programs at institutions of higher education in Texas, by providing scholarship funding to qualified students who participate. The Texas Armed Services Scholarship Program is a mechanism to provide financial aid to our men and women seeking professional and postsecondary education while bravely serving our country. The Armed Services Scholarship Program authorizes the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, and each member of the Senate and House of Representatives to appoint two qualified applicants to receive a $15,000 scholarship through the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. A total of 81 scholarships were granted, and these are represented here today by over 30 individuals representing a number of higher ed institutions across the great State of Texas. And I would ask my colleagues who are standing here with me, and the rest of the members of the House of Representatives to welcome you to your Texas House. We're glad you're here. I move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. In honor of Texas A&M University, Mrs. Kuempel moves to add all members' names. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Hardcastle.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, in the gallery today we have members of the Texas National Guard that are currently deployed in Afghanistan to defend freedom and improve the general affairs of the citizens of Afghanistan. We believe it's important that we connect to this emerging government with resources, knowledge and people to assist them as they grow in capacity and responsibility. We are pleased to recognize our Texas National Guard Taskforce, White Eagle Aggregate Business Deployment Team, and their distinguish colleagues from

(inaudible) province in Afghanistan. Their business is funded by the U.S. Department of State, and compliments the long-term support and development of agriculture capacity and governance for (inaudible) province. During their visit the delegation will meet and establish relationship with their government, industry, educational counterparts at Texas A&M University. We believe their time here in Texas will significantly impact their vision for the state and their capacity to become a state and move forward with their country. Will the gentleman and our distinguished visitors please stand for a Texas welcome? Thank y'all for coming. If any of you watched the news this morning, they've already met the Commissioner of Agriculture yesterday, and he had a little news conference. And we appreciate y'all being here and hope we share a lot with you, and hope y'all share a lot with us. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Pena.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I move to suspend all necessary rules to take up and consider House Memorial Resolution 1487, recognizing a great Texan from the Valley, Mr. Jorge Saenz.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, this is a memorial resolution. Please take your seats and move your conversations out past the rail. Is there anyone who objects to taking up and considering the following resolution? The rules are suspended. Chair lays out the following resolution. The clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HR1487 by Pena. WHEREAS, Memories of a life filled with joyful times and meaningful accomplishments remain to comfort the family and friends of Jorge Saenz of Elsa, who passed away on February 15, 2011, at the age of 85; and WHEREAS, Born on March 10, 1925, near Rio Grande City, Jorge Saenz was the third of seven sons born to Gregorio and Trinidad Rodriguez Saenz; he left high school as a sophomore to help his parents and siblings but later earned his GED; and WHEREAS, Mr. Saenz was employed for many years in the plastics industry, working with Texas Plastics and then with Cadillac Products in Detroit before returning to the Lone Star State to serve as a community liaison for the Edcouch-Elsa Independent School District; and WHEREAS, Deeply committed to education, Mr. Saenz attended Pan American University while continuing to make a living and take care of his family; in later years, he enthusiastically supported the efforts of his wife and seven children to obtain their college Education at the school, now known as The University of Texas-Pan American; those efforts were honored by the UTPA Alumni Association when it named the Jorge Saenz family as the Distinguished Family of The Year in 1991; and WHEREAS, Mr. Saenz gave back to his fellow residents as a Member of the Hidalgo County Health Clinic board and the Elsa Volunteer Fire Department; in addition, he benefited many area Youth, offering his wise counsel, sharing his time with the Boy Scouts and T-ball, and collecting donations to provide lunches to children in need; and WHEREAS, In all his endeavors, Mr. Saenz enjoyed the love and Support of his wife, Laurentina, and their seven children, Rick Rolando, Bernard, Jonas, Marco, Sonia, and Dina; and WHEREAS, Jorge Saenz possessed a generosity of spirit that Expressed itself in myriad ways, and countless lives were enriched by his warmth and kindness; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives of the 82nd Texas Legislature hereby pay tribute to the memory of Jorge Saenz and Extend deepest sympathy to the members of his family: to his wife Laurentina Saenz; to his sons, Jorge Enrique Saenz and his wife Chriselda, Rolando Saenz and his wife, Gloria, Bernard Saenz and His wife, San Juanita, Jonas Abel Saenz and his wife, Judy, and Marco Antonio Saenz and his wife, Celia; to his daughters, Sonia del Angel and her husband, Jose Antonio, and Dina Vela and her husband Luis; to his brothers, Erasmo Saenz and his wife, Cande, and Noe Saenz and his wife, Luisa; to his 15 grandchildren; and to his other Relatives and friends; and, be it further RESOLVED, That an official copy of this resolution be Prepared for his family and that when the Texas House of Representatives adjourns this day, it do so in memory of Jorge Saenz.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Pena.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Members, please honor my community in recognizing one of its great leaders. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, this is a memorial resolution. All those in favor, please rise. The resolution is unanimously adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Pena.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Thank you, members. Thank you for taking moment out of your busy schedule to recognize somebody who meant a lot to our community. Mr. Saenz was a model citizen in every possible way. He enriched the Rio Grande Valley community through his hard work, efforts to promote education and willingness to serve his fellow residents. His support of education for his family and others were honored by the UTPA Alumni Association when they named the Jorge Saenz family the 1991 Distinguished Family of The Year. Mr. Saenzs' desire to serve his community lead him to become a member of the Hidalgo County Health Clinic Board, as well as the Elsa Volunteer Fire Department. The community as a whole greatly benefited from Mr. Saenzs' tireless service to better and protect his fellow citizens. His examples have and will continue to leave a lasting impression in the Rio Grande Valley. On the dias with us today is Florentina and Marco Saenz. Jonas, Jorge and Sonia (inaudible). In the gallery we have Orlando Saenz, Deena Saenz Vela, Ariana Saenz, Talia Saenz and Luca Saenz. If you-all could please rise. And, members, if you would honor us one last time with a round of applause in recognition of the life of a great gentleman who dedicated himself our community. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Fletcher.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: Mr. Speaker , members, I request that we recognize -- on House Bill Resolution 1682, suspend all rules.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out the following resolution. The clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HR1682 by Fletcher. Recognizing May 3, 2011, as Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District Day at the State Capitol.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Fletcher.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members, ladies and gentlemen; please stand up. We want to recognize Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District here on Capitol Day. It's the third largest school district in the State of Texas and absolutely in the top 50 largest in the nation with the highest graduation rate. And that just means you get the job done. We're so proud of you and so glad to have you here in your House. We've got Representative Patricia Harless, Bill Callegari, Representative Riddle was here a moment ago, Representative Bohac is getting his picture taken. So we appreciate y'all being here and hope to see you today, and please enjoy your House. Thank you very much.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Zerwas for a recognition.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Members, today it's my honor to acknowledge some guests in the southeast gallery here as part of Fighting Arthritis Pain Day at the Capitol. I'm honored to introduce a group of folks from around the State advocating the fight against arthritis pain. In Texas, 24 percent of adults suffer from arthritis. It's a disease that impacts people of all ages, ethnicities and socio-economic status. House Resolution 748, which will be read later, says that if more than 4.1 million Texas adults who have arthritis, which would amount to the combined size of Austin, Houston and San Antonio. I would like to particularly recognize the children in the group, many of us don't think about children having arthritis, but more than 300,000 children in the United States have physician diagnosed arthritis. If arthritis pain (inaudible) today, it's Fight Arthritis Pain month here in Texas. We must continue to reduce the pain of arthritis on Texans by increasing awareness, by maintaining folks on an arthritis plan set forth by the Texas Department of State Health Services. Members, they are standing up in the southeast corner. Please help me welcome them to their House of Representatives. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Miller for an introduction.

REPRESENTATIVE DOUG MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, it's my honor today to recognize a young lady, actually a couple of young ladies who are here with us, but one in particular. I would like to recognize Jessica Benson. If she would rise. Jessica is a student over at Texas A&M University, and she's here shadowing me today, and she was going to be with Chairman Pitts, but she think took the lesser of two evils and came with me, because he's going to be a little busy today. And -- But I'm glad to have Jessica here with me. She's part of a program down there called Leadership Fellows, and it takes about twenty students and teaches them all kinds of leadership skills, and how to work together. And she has one of her directors here today, the Honorable Amanda Miller, who is very close to me, and who will graduate from Texas A&M on the 13th of this month. And I will be absent from this floor, watching their graduations. So give a hand to Jessica and Amanda, we appreciate it.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: The Chair recognizes Mr. Dutton.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to suspend all necessary rules, and the unnecessary ones, to bring up Resolution 1701, which honors the Sugar Valley Chapter of the Top Ladies of Distinction.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out the following resolution. Clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HR1701 by Dutton. Commending the 2011 honorees of the Sugar Valley Chapter of the Top Ladies of Distinction's recognition of scholarship luncheon.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Dutton.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Than k you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I move adoption of the resolution.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Is there any objection to the adoption of the motion? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Mr. Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Than k you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I move to suspend all necessary rules to take up and consider HR1386.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, you heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out the following resolution. The clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HR1386 by Raymond. WHEREAS, In just one year, The University of Texas Community Outreach has made a measurable difference in the effort to prevent And control diabetes; and WHEREAS, UTCO currently serves people in Cameron, Galveston Nueces, and Webb Counties who have diabetes or are at risk of Developing the disease; the program employs Department of State Health Services-certified Community Health Workers to guide Education, nutrition, and physical activity interventions, and Between September 2009 and November 2010, UTCO achieved more than 39,000 contacts; and WHEREAS, Economic savings and health impacts as a result of This outreach have already been documented; a survey of Brownsville Clients revealed that only 40.9 percent met physical activity Guidelines without the intervention of a Community Health Worker While 59.1 percent met the guidelines if a trained UTCO Community Health Worker guided an intervention; moreover, UTCO has seen Decreases in participants' blood glucose levels, abdominal weight And overall weight; and WHEREAS, The average annual cost to treat an individual with Diabetes is $12,000; for a fraction of that, $21.50 per at-risk Individual per year, UTCO provides in-home prevention assistance Screening and monitoring, media campaigns, exercise and nutrition Classes, and facilities; the average lifetime treatment cost for a Diabetic with end-stage renal disease is $1.5 million, while the UTCO annual budget for reaching 80,000 people in four counties is Only $3 million; and WHEREAS, A diabetes epidemic is overwhelming the state and Draining taxpayer funds; the low-cost UTCO model shifts the Emphasis from treatment to prevention, utilizing permanent local Expertise and infrastructure, and the program is indeed deserving Of recognition; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives of the 82nd Texas Legislature hereby honor The University of Texas Community Outreach For its achievements in promoting community-based prevention and Control of diabetes and obesity and commend all those associated With UTCO for their outstanding efforts; and, be it further RESOLVED, That an official copy of this resolution be Prepared for The University of Texas Community Outreach as an Expression of high regard by the Texas House of Representatives.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Than k you, Mr. Speaker. Members, we know that diabetes is one of the most serious illnesses that we have in this country, diseases that we have in this country. Certainly, in Texas and on the border, in south Texas. But it's also one that we can cure. It's one whose future we can shape. The University of Texas Treat Program aims to prevent and control diabetes in four counties; Cameron county, Galveston county, Nueces county, and Webb County. UTCO offers in-home prevention services, as well as exercise and nutrition classes. UTCO has seen increases in physical activity and decreases in body weight among many of its clients. UTCO is a low cost program spending just over twenty dollars per year to treat one client. The individuals involved in this endeavor are moving the focus from treatment to prevention, and I commend and we should all commend them for doing their work in doing so. We should also continue to support them in this tremendous program. Members, I'd like to recognize some of the folks who are here as part of this program, some very dear friends of mine from Laredo. Sister Rosemary Welsh with the Mercy Clinic in Webb County, Rosanne

(inaudible) with the Mercy Clinic in Webb County. And also with them, Lapeta Sanchez Juan Diego in Cameron County, Linda McKenney Catholic Social Services in Nueces County, and Julie Lee, representative of the Student Health Advocacy Volunteers. Members, I hope you help me welcome these wonderful people to our chamber, and thank them for their good work. And, Mr. Speaker, I move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, you've heard the motion to adoption. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Lucio and Representative Guillen and move to add all members' names. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Mr. Gooden.

REPRESENTATVIE LANCE GOODEN: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to suspend all necessary rules to take up and consider HR1617.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out Resolution 1617. Clerk please read the resolution.

CLERK: HR1617 by Gooden. Congratulating the North Texas Municipal Water District on its receipt of the 2011 Environmental Excellence Award for Water Conservation.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Chair recognizes Representative Gooden.

REPRESENTATVIE LANCE GOODEN: I move motion.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Davis for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN E. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, members, I would like to suspend the following rules: The 25 day posting rule, to allow the Committee on Economic and Small Business Development to consider Senate Bill 1534 at 9:00 a.m. May 5th, 2011, in room E2.014.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, you heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following announcements: Clerk will read the announcements.

CLERK: The Committee on Economic and Small Business Development will meet at 9:00 a.m. on May 5th, 2011, at E2.1014. This will be a public hearing to consider SB1534 and previously posted agenda.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, we have a housekeeping measure. A reminder, if you want to sign on to Mr. Farias' resolution from yesterday, please go to the Chief Clerk's Office to do so. If you need to make a notation with the journal clerk, please do that. We ask you that complete both of those tasks by 12:00 today. Members, we're about to begin the Local and Consent Calendar. Please be ready if you have any bills on the calendar. Chair recognizes Representative Hopson for an introduction.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: For what purpose, Mr. Turner?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Just a parliamentary inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Are you saying with regards to Resolution 1694, I believe?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Whatever Mr. Farias' number was on that resolution.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: You're saying all members' names were added as of yesterday?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: It's my understanding that all members' names were added and, like any other resolution, if you want your name removed you go and see the journal clerk to have that done.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: That is fine. No problem.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Mr. Speaker, members, it is a pleasure for me today to be able to introduce the students from Carlisle Junior High. Carlisle Junior High is in Rusk County. They're accompanied by their principal, Rick Thompson. And I wanted to say that for the students there that don't know, I'm an alumni from your school. I'm proud of you. Thank y'all for being here and if y'all would stand up? Thank y'all for coming to the Capitol.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative McClendon to explain House Bill 114.

REPRESENTATIVE RUTH JONES MCCLENDON: Than k you Madam Speaker and members. This House Bill would elevate cancer awareness among the general public and minority population.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to the consideration of House Bill 114? If not, the Chair hears none. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB114 by McClendon. Relating to designating April as Minority Cancer Awareness Month.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative McClendon.

REPRESENTATIVE RUTH JONES MCCLENDON: Move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 114 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Raymond to explain House Bill 152. House Bill 152 has been withdrawn from the calendar. The Chair recognizes Representative Howard of Travis to explain House Bill 554.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA HOWARD: Mr. Speaker, members, House Bill 554 is a local bill that allows the City of Austin to hold the local optional election seeking voter approval to include EMS --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 554? Chair hears none. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB554 by Howard. Relating to the civil service status of emergency medical services personnel in certain municipalities.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Howard of Travis.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA HOWARD: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 554 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So order. The Chair calls on Representative Deshotel to explain House Bill 557.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: House Bill 557 creates a Rail District in Jefferson County.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 557? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 557. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB557 by Deshotel. Relating to areas in which rail districts may be created.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Deshotel.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 557 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Pitts to explain House Bill 592.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Madam Speaker, members, House Bill 592 allows for a certain county to decide whether or not --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 592? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 592. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB592 by Pitts. Relating to certain counties that are not required to operate a juvenile justice alternative education program.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Pitts.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 592. Is there objection? Chair hairs none. So ordered. The Chair calls on Representative Chisum to explain House Bill 633.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Mrs. Speaker and members, House Bill 633 just allows to (inaudible) refund certain fees that they should not have charged --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 633? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 633. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB633 by Chisum. Relating to certain nonrefundable application fees established by the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Chisum.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 633. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair calls on Representative Anchia to explain House Bill 825. Representative Anchia? Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Thank you, Mrs. Speaker. I'd like to postpone House Bill 825 until the next Local and Consent Calendar, so the Senate Bill will catch up. And that would be on Friday -- Friday May 6th, until the next Local and Consent Calendar.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Frullo to explain House Bill 923.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I move to postpone Senate Bill 398 until we can catch up with Senate Bill 398.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 923 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 398. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB398 by Duncan. Relating to the board of hospital managers of the Lubbock County Hospital District.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Frullo.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: I move to postpone until the next Local and Consent Calendar. That's good news, members. 398 is a local issue. It's a clean up bill with an oversight with an official member of the Texas Headquarter Region that this is the Lubbock County Hospital District. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of Senate Bill 398. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Frullo moves to lay House Bill 923 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Lavender to explain House Bill 1012.

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: Thank you Madam Speaker and members, this is just a local bill that allows a name change from Red River Authority to Texas American --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: For what purpose, Mr. Farias?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. Laven der, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: I'd be happy to.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Representative Lavender, I didn't want you to just sneak through here because you're my neighbor, because this is your first bill. So I just wanted people to know that you're up there, and you were very serious about this, so you thought you were just going to sneak this one through. But, evidently, you're not. So I hope somebody comes down here an just harasses you a little bit, because that's part of the process, and I got harassed when I was here my first year, so welcome anybody to come up here and ask Representative Lavender what color his signs were when he ran for this office.

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: Well, thank you for remembering this. Thank you so much.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the Senate Companion to HB1012 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 410. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB410 by Eltife. Relating to the name and powers of the Red River Redevelopment Authority.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Lavender.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: For what purpose, Representative?

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Would the gentleman yield for one question?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: I will, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Mr. Lavender, how old is the Red River?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: How old is the Red River?

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Yeah.

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: Pretty old.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Why do we need to redevelop it?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: Well, it just seems like a good thing to do, and in our part of the country we like to redevelop stuff.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: But hadn't the Red River been doing fine for all these millennium without us redeveloping it?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: Most of the time, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Are you trying to change the name of the river?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: Yeah, we're going to call it Texas America River. That sounds better, doesn't it?

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Well, I don't know about that. What about the Lavender River?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: Probably not.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: For what purpose, Representative Kolkhorst?

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Do you yield, Representative Lavender?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: I'd be happy to.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Representa tive Lavender, last night I was visiting with some folks and we were talking about at the freshman class and how many there are of you, and we were talking about how we learned each of your names. And I go well, Representative Lavender, you always know who he is, because he always has on a lavender tie. Your first bill, what is going on here?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: I thought red was more appropriate today, since its the Red River Redevelopment Authority.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: There you have it. Clever freshman. Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to further consideration of Senate Bill 410? Chair hears none.

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: For what purpose, Representative Hamilton?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: One quick question.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: Is there your very first bill?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: It's my very first bill.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: And you're going let the Senator take it over, is that what you're doing?

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: I'm all about passing bills. Whatever it takes.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: Would you please have some dignity and go across that room right there, go over there to the Senate and tell him we're not passing his bill, we're passing our bills.

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: Thank you. Thank you. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of Senate Bill 410. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Lavender moves to lay House Bill 1012 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair calls on Representative Raymond to explain House Bill 1113.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Memb ers, 1113 provides a sentencing hearing may take place before four high school students --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1113? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1113. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1113 by Raymond. Relating to the sentencing hearing or deferred adjudication hearing and conditions of community supervision for defendants convicted of certain offenses involving controlled substances.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 1113. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair calls on Representative Gallego to explain House Bill 1199.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: (Inaudible ).

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Excuse me?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: House Bill 1199 (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: One more time, a little more distinctly.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Okay. House Bill 1199 (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1199? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1199. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1199 by Gallego.. Relating to the penalty for certain intoxication assaults.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: For what purpose, Mr. Driver?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Would you like for me to interpret for you?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Represent ative Driver, I think we all need it at this point, maybe even Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 1199 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair calls on Representative Reynolds to explain House Bill 1224.

REPRESENTATIVE RON REYNOLDS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, HB1224 would add retail school district computer systems to the list of reasons that a student --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to the consideration of House Bill 1224? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1224. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1224 by Reynolds. Relating to expulsion of a public school student who commits certain criminal acts involving a computer, computer network, or computer system owned by or operated on behalf of a school district.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Reynolds.

REPRESENTATIVE RON REYNOLDS: I move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 1224 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chairs call on Representative Smith of Tarrant to explain House Bill 1252.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD SMITH: Mr. Speaker, members, House Bill 1252 expands the powers and duties of a criminal law magistrate.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 1252 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 483. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB482 by Harris. Relating to the powers and duties of criminal law magistrates in Tarrant County.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Smith.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD SMITH: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of Senate Bill 483. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Smith of Terrant moves to lay out House Bill 1252 on table subject to call is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Smithee to explain House Bill 1253.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN T. SMITHEE: Madam Speaker, members, this bill requires notification of changes to a health plan.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1253? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1253. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1253 by Smithee. Relating to notice of enrollment of notification of small and large --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Smithee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN T. SMITHEE: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 1253 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Hochberg to explain House Bill 1291.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Madam Speaker, members, this bill protects toll drivers from unfair fines.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1291? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1291. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1291 by Hochberg. Relating to operation of toll projects.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Hochberg.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 1291 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair calls on Representative Raymond to explain House Bill 1314.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Madam Speaker, members, 1314 allows criminal complaints to be presented to grand jury in district court in Webb County. And I have one for an amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, there is an amendment. The clerk will read the amendment. Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1314? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1314. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1314 by Raymond. Relating to the operation of the 111th District Court.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Memb ers, the amendment simply says that all civil cases not signed and docketed in district court, based on the type of case get served to the court under applicable law. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 1314. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair calls on Representative Veasey to explain House Bill 1345.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Members, House Bill 1345 will extend the statute of limitations for the crime of --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1345? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1345. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1345 by Veasey. Relating to a statute of limitations on prosecution of the offenses of kidnapping and aggravated kidnapping of a minor.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Veasey.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 1345. Is there objection? Chair hears none so ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Laubenberg to explain House Bill 1401.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: This is a technical clean up for a local option liquor license, making sure that all voters are covered. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1401? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1401. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1401 by Laubenberg. Relating to whom may participate in certain local option elections to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Laubenberg.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 1401. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair calls on Representative Guillen to explain House Bill 1402.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this bill is a clean up bill to a bill we had last session.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1402? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1402. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1402 by Guillen. Relating to the applicability of the law on the consequences of a criminal conviction to law enforcement officer license holders and applicants.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: We have -- Chair recognizes Representative Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 1402. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Brown to explain House Bill 1615.

REPRESENTATIVE FRED BROWN: Thank you, Madam Chair. Members, there is a amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1615? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1615. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1615 by Brown. Relating to the administering of medications to children in certain facilities; providing criminal penalties.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The following amendment: The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Brown.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Brown.

REPRESENTATIVE FRED BROWN: Thank you Madam chairman and members, this language just cleans up some of the penalty portions of Nathan's Law preventing potential conflict.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Brown.

REPRESENTATIVE FRED BROWN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this bill is relating to administrating of medicines to children in certain facilities providing criminal penalties.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 1615. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Menendez to explain House Bill 1622. Chair recognizes Representative Marquez.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Members, this is relating to suits to enjoin gang activity that constitutes a public nuisance.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1622? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 162. The the clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1622 by Menendez. Relating to suits to enjoin gang activity that constitutes a public nuisance.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Marquez.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 1622 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Zerwas to explain House Bill 1643.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. 1643 provides a section of local government code to provide better --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1643? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1643. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1643 by Zerwas. Relating to the duration of a development agreement governing land in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of certain municipalities.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Zerwas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 1643 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair calls on Representative Farias to explain House Bill 1789.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Madam Chair, House Bill 1789 allows the county officials to request an election repayment.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1789? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1789. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1789 by Farias. Relating to payment of state funds directly to an entity that conducts a primary election under contract in certain counties.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Farias.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 1789 to third read. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Huberty to explain House Bill 1805.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, House Bill 1805 adjusts the transferability for a state grant.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1805? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1805. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1805 by Huberty. Relating to public schools eligible for a public education grant at public schools.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Huberty.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 1805 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat to explain House Bill 1830.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: Members, this will allow probate judges to use emails to notify parties.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1830? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1830. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1830 by Naishtat. Relating to the method of delivery of certain notices sent by statutory probate court associate judges.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 1830. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Guillen to explain House Bill 1843.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, House Bill 1843 would discontinue the annual management in an efficiency review.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1843? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1843. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1843 by Guillen. Relating to the discontinuation of management an efficiency reviews by the Parks and Wildlife Department.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Guillen. There objection to consideration of House Bill 1843?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: I move to move it to the end of the calendar, to the end of the Local and Consent Calendar.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Representa tive Guillen moves to House Bill 1843 to the end of the calendar. Is there objection? So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson to explain House Bill 1959.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Madam Speaker, members, this is requiring the notice of a judgment -- for filing of foreign judgment.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 1959? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 1959. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1959 by Thompson. Relating to repeal of refusal of an alcoholic beverage license.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occur on passage to third reading of House Bill 1959. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Gallego to explain House Bill 1988.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I move to withdraw House Bill 1988 from the calendar pending the addition of an amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Hardcastle to explain House Bill 2013.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Madam Speaker, I believe Senate Bill has caught up.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 2013 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 1258. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB1258 by Duncan. Relating to the disposal of demolition waste from abandoned or nuisance buildings in certain areas.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Hardcastle.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of Senate Bill 1258. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Hardcastle moves to lay House Bill 2013 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Hartnett to explain House Bill 2028.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this is a local bill that allows a local fee to help complete the new courthouse.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2028? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2028. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2028 by Hartnett. Relating to additional fee for filing civil cases in certain Rockwell County courts.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Hartnett.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2028. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat to explain House Bill 2069.

REPRESENTATIVE BARBARA NASH: Members, this bill allows pharmacists to dispense up to a 90-day supply of dangerous drugs and accelerate refills.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2069? Chair hears none and calls -- lays out House Bill 2069. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2069 by Naishtat. Relating to the authority of a pharmacist to dispense up to a 90-day supply of dangerous drugs and accelerate refills.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage of House Bill 2069 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson to explain House Bill 2094.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: This is giving notice to a judgment debtor of the filing of a foreign judgment.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 2094 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 428. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB428 by Huffman. Relating to notice to a judgment debtor of the filing of a foreign judgment.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 428. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Thompson moves to lay House Bill 2094 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Elkins to explain House Bill 2189.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Relating to the regulation of hand fishing.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2189? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2189. The clerk will reads the bill.

CLERK: HB2199 by Elkins. Relating to the regulation of hand fishing.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Elkins.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 2189 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair calls on Representative Phillips to explain House Bill 2256.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: This is relating to victims of identity theft.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2256? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2256. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2256 by Phillips. Relating to abating or deferring the suspension or revocation of a license issued by the Department of Public Safety for victims of identity theft.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2256. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair calls on Representative Ritter to explain House Bill 2265.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, House Bill 2265 amends to a county audit of a hotel regarding the hotel occupancy tax.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there any objection to consideration of House Bill 2265? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2265. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2265 by Ritter. Relating to a county audit of a hotel regarding the hotel occupancy tax.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Ritter.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2265. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Eiland to explain House Bill 2280.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: 2280 is relating to the composition of the permit advisory committee to advise TCU regarding --

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: For what purpose, Representative Hardcastle?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Would the gentleman yield for a couple of questions?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. Eilan d, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. And, Mr. Eiland, is your intent with this bill that a number of advisory committee members remain the same for that school district or junior college district, Representative point

(inaudible) one of the current positions designated to represent as taxing?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: So the way you in envision TCQ implementing this is for school district or junior college districts to fill the spot of one of the three slots TCQ currently has for taxing units, the next time their term runs out?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: I understand that two of the three current taxing unit reps will complete their two year term at the end of the year, so your idea would be for one of those two slots to be filled by the school district or junior college district Representative completed -- contemplated by your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Madam Speaker, I move that the the comments between Mr. Eiland and myself be reduced to writing for the record.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you're heard the motion. Is there objection? So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2280. Is there objection? Let's lay out the bill first. Sorry. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2280 by Eiland.. Relating to the composition of the permanent advisory committee to advise the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regarding the implementation of the ad valorem tax exemption for pollution control property.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Eiland.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2880. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Anchia.

REPRESENTATIVE RAFAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, Mrs. Speaker. Members, I move to recover the vote by which House Bill 825 was removed from the local calendar.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. That brings up House Bill 825, members. Chair recognizes Representative Anchia to explain House Bill 825.

REPRESENTATIVE RAFAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, Madam Chair and members, I move to postpone to time certain, that being Monday at 7:00 a.m. Next Monday, at 7:00 a.m.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you're heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Miller of Comal.

REPRESENTATIVE DOUG MILLER: Madam Speaker, this is HB2310 and it deals with district courts in Comal County.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there any objection to consideration of House Bill 2310? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2310. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2310 by Miller. Relating to the appointment of bailiffs for the district courts in Comal, Hays, and Caldwell Counties.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE DOUG MILLER: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2310. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair calls on Representative Coleman to explain House Bill 2312.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker and members. What this does is deals with how commissioners court post meetings.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2312? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2312. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2312 by Coleman. Relating to the creation of a sickle cell disease program.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Coleman. Let's back up, members. I think we have the wrong bill. The Chair recognizes Representative Coleman to explain House Bill 2312.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: I apologize. Yeah, they don't do anything, either. This is House Bill 2312 that deals with the sickle cell program and counsel for the State of Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2312? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2312. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2312 by Coleman. Relating to the creation of a sickle cell disease program.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Thank you. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2312. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Mr. Coleman to explain House Bill 2313.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Okay. Now I have the one that deals with posting notice for a county commissioners meeting.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to House Bill 2313? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2313. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2313 by Coleman. Relating to certain notice requirements for municipalities and counties under the open meetings law.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Thank you to the Local and Consent Calendar. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2313. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair calls on Representative McClendon to explain House Bill 2370.

REPRESENTATIVE RUTH JONES MCCLENDON: This bill relates to a certain notice to applicants who provide care under the permanency care assistance program.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2370? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2370. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2370 by McClendon. Relating to certain notice to applicants to provide care under the permanency care assistance program.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative McClendon.

REPRESENTATIVE RUTH JONES MCCLENDON: Move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 2370 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Menendez to explain House Bill 2387.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker and members. HB2387 clarifies that the appraisal board of directors has the right to maintain an in-house --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2387? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2387. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2387 by Menendez. Relating to the selection, compensation, and duties of the general counsel to an appraisal district.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Menendez.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2387. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Davis of Harris. Representative Sarah Davis of Harris.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Thank you, Madam Chair. Members, House Bill 2393 provides a defense for a company (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to House Bill 2393? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2393. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2393 by Sarah Davis of Harris. Relating to a request by the owner of an ownership interest in a domestic entity that the interest be uncertificated.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Sarah Davis of Harris.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 2393 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson to explain House Bill 2422. Representative Thompson? Representative Thompson? Representative Thompson to explain House Bill 2422.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Madam speaker, members, this gives a procedure on how to give a divorce decree to a person.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2422? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2422. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2422 by Thompson. Relating to the procedure for providing a copy of the final decree of dissolution of a marriage to a party who waived service of process.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Thompson. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: It's an amendment that takes away the service of process of giving a divorce decree.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of the amendment to House Bill 2422? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on the passage of House Bill 2422 as amended to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Thompson to -- is withdrawn from the calendar. The Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Madam speaker, member,s I would like to withdraw House Bill 2324 from the calendar to be able to amend it in the future.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Phillips to explain House Bill 2471.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Members, this bill will help protect our animals.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2471? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2471. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2471 by Phillips. Relating to limiting the civil liability of certain persons who obtain or provide medical care and treatment for certain animals.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage of House Bill 2471 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to lay out House Bill 2490.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Thank you, Madam speaker. Members, this helps strengthen the the (inaudible) for gold dealers.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there an amendment? Clerk will read the House Bill 24920.

CLERK: HB2490 by Solomons. Relating to the regulation of certain metal detectors; providing criminal penalties.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to explain the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: There is a committee amendment which excludes coins, medallions and bars from the definition of the crafted precious metals, and excludes certain other items.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 2490 to third reading, as amended, to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Alvarado to explain House Bill 2516.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Thank you Madam Speaker and members, this applies only to the City of Houston. It clarifies --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2516? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2516. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2516 by Alvarado. Relating to the appeal of an indefinite suspension of a municipal firefighter or police officer.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Alvarado.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Thank you, ma'am. This is a local bill and it applies to Houston only. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading on House Bill 2516. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair calls on Representative Kuempel to explain House Bill 2519.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN KUEMPEL: Mrs. Speaker , members, HB2519 clarifies current auctioneer law regarding --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2519? Chair hears none. So ordered, and lays out House Bill 2519. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2519 by Kuempel. Relating to the regulation of certain motor vehicle auctions.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Kuempel.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN KUEMPEL: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2519. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair calls on Representative Branch to explain House Bill 2628.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this relates to posting signs at school crossing zones regarding the prohibition of wireless communication devices.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2628? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2628. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2628 by Branch. Relating to the posting of signs in school crossing zones regarding the prohibited use of a wireless communication device while operating a motor vehicle.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 2628 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The chair recognizes Representative Branch to explain House Bill 2629. Mr. Branch, could you move a little faster?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this relates to travel and incidental expenses, lodging, meals --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2629? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2629. The clerk will read the bill. There's a Senate Companion, over and eligible, for House Bill 2629. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 1269.

CLERK: SB1269 by Wentworth.. Relating to honorariums offered to and accepted by public servants.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Mrs. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: For what purpose, Representative Hopson?

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: I would like to ask Representative Branch a couple questions.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Do you yield, Representative Branch?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: I do.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Thank you, Mrs. Chairman. Is this bill intended clarify the law or does it create new law?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: This bill is solely clarification for how the law was meant to read when it was originally passed. It is not meant to be new law.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Representati ve Branch, what about instances where an office holder attends an conference, or a seminar, or receives a meal; but doesn't provide services at that event?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: As the law is currently written, it only requires the office holder to provide more than merely perfunctory services in an event, if the office holder is going to receive transportation or lodging. The law does not require the office holder to provide those services to receive a meal. Again, this is currently the law and this bill does nothing to change that.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Okay, Chairman Branch, thank you. Madam Speaker, I request that our conversation between chairman Branch and I be reduced to writing and placed in the journal.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of Senate Bill 1269. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Branch moves to lay House Bill 2629 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Branch to explain House Bill 2630.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this relates to the formal recognition administration at Texas A&M University Health Science Center.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2630? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2630. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2630 by Branch. Relating to the formal recognition and administration of the Texas A&M University System Health Science Center.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2630. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Hamilton to explain House Bill 2643.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: This bill will allow TDLR to establish minimum insurance and experience --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2643? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2643. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2643 by Hamilton. Relating to safety standards for elevators, escalators and related equipment.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Hamilton.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: For what purpose, Mr. Branch?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Would the gentleman yield for a series of questions?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Mr. Hamilt on, do you yield for questions?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: Yes, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The gentleman yields for questions.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Mr. Hamilton, could you tell the House chamber some of your thoughts about how members should bring Chair bills to the front mic?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: Well, I think whenever a member has three bills in a row he should bring all three packages, instead of going back and forth. But some members have staff that does that, and they don't allow the staff on the floor like the Senate. So, you know, maybe when he runs for Attorney General maybe somebody can follow him around.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Is this what your current bill, 2643, does? It's sort of a nanny state bill that micro manages --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: It makes sure that House members can bring their own packets to the podium, and they don't have to have staff to do it.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: I think that says it all, Madam Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. Hamil ton, that's the only exercise he gets. The question occurs on passage of House Bill 2643 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Sheets to explain House Bill 2655.

REPRESENTATIVE KENNETH SHEETS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I move to recommit House Bill 2655. I move to withdraw House Bill 2655 from the calendar, recommit it to Local and Consent.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson to explain House Bill 2711.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Madam Speaker and members, this is a bill that allows juvenile records to be sealed for those kids who have been involved --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2711? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2711. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2711 by Thompson. Relating to the sealing of records of juveniles who are the victims of human trafficking and have been adjudicated to have engaged in certain delinquent conduct.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Thompson to move passage. The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2711. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair calls on Representative Thompson to explain House Bill 2727.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: This requires those persons who put on eyelashes to be licensed.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to the consideration of House Bill 2727? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2727. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2727 by Thompson. Relating to the regulation by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation of the application of eyelash extensions and private beauty culture schools; providing a criminal penalty.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 2727 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Pena to explain House Bill 2758.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: This relates to the mandatory emergency alert systems of institutions of higher education.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2758? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2758. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2758 by Pena. Relating to mandatory emergency alert systems at institutions of higher education.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Pena.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2758. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Smith of Harris to explain House Bill 2770.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Members, this deals with how ports perform their duties.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2770? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2770. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2770 by Smith of Harris. Relating to powers and duties of navigation districts, port authorities, and certain municipalities.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Smith of Harris.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2770. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Hunter to explain House Bill 2790.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: This is the Scott Larson Golf Cart Bill for certain counties.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2790? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2790. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2790 by Hunter. Relating to the operation of a golf cart or utility vehicle on a public highway in certain counties.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on the passage of House Bill 2790 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Madden to explain House Bill 2847.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Mrs. Speaker , members, this is a video conferencing bill for certain courts.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2847? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2847. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2847 by Madden. Relating to the use of video teleconferencing systems in certain criminal proceedings.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Madden.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2847. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Mallory Caraway to explain House Bill 2851.

REPRESENTATIVE MALLORY CARAWAY: 2851 refers to the deferral of certain surcharge payments for military personnel deployed outside the country.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2851? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2851. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2851 by Mallory Caraway. Relating to the deferral of certain surcharge payments for military personnel deployed outside of the continental United States.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Mallory Caraway.

REPRESENTATIVE MALLORY CARAWAY: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2851. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative John Davis of Harris to explain House Bill 2853.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN E. DAVIS: Yes, ma'am. This bill relates to the tax increment financing zones.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2853? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2853. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2853 by John Davis of Harris. Relating to tax increment financing zones.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative John Davis of Harris.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN E. DAVIS: Madam Speaker, I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2853. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Branch and his sherpa to explain House Bill 2911.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Madam Speaker, that's a sherpa, not a slurpa.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Whatever.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Members, this is 2911 relating to the guaranteed student loans and alternative student education.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2911? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2911. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2911 by Branch. Relating to guaranteed student loans and alternative education loans.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2911. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Hunter to explain House Bill 2978.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Madam Speaker, members, and Representatives.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Mrs. Speaker ? Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: For what purpose, Mrs. Davis?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I'd like to ask Chairman Hunter a couple of questions for intent, please.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. Hunter , do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Absolutely. Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Chairman Hunter, your bill deals with open meetings, and in no way are you trying to close the open meeting process; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: You are absolutely correct.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: And, actually, this deals with a particular area only, so we're not going to worry about open meetings being undermined?

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: One hundred percent correct. And for our intent, so the members know, this only deals with adding words to the statute and it will not open it up or expand in any way.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Thank you. Madam Speaker, I'd like to move to have the words reduced -- the conversation between the Chairman and I reduced to writing and placed in the journal.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to further consideration of House Bill 2978? Chair hears none and lays out 2978. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2978 by Hunter. Relating to the applicability of open meetings requirements to certain meetings of the governing board of a county hospital or county hospital authority.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: This is for protection on boating and dragging boats behind trucks. Sorry, this is the Yvonne Davis and mine -- This is the open records with municipal verses county hospitals.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Do you move passage? The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2978. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Hunter to explain House Bill 2981.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Now this is my boating bill that when you bring trailers behind vehicles.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2981? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2981. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2981 by Hunter. Relating to the operation on a highway or street of a motor vehicle that is drawing a boat or a personal watercraft in or on which a person is riding; providing a penalty.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2981. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair calls on Representative Lewis to explain House Bill 2999.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This House Bill 2999 deals with optional tuition programs, tuition programs for certain associate degrees.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 2999? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 2999. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2999 by Lewis. Relating to the fixed tuition rate program for certain students who transfer to a state university after completing an associate degree program.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Lewis.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2999. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Gallego to explain House Bill 3076.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. House Bill 3076 relates to

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3076? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3076. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3076 by Gallego. Relating to the rate of the hotel occupancy tax in certain counties.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs to passage of third reading of House Bill 3076. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat to explain House Bill 3033. Representative Naishtat?

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: Members, this bill effects the City of Austin's employee retirement system.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3033? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3033. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3033 by Naishtat. Relating to retirement under public retirement systems for employees of certain municipalities.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading to House Bill 3033. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Gallego to explain House Bill 3077.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. House Bill 3077, I move to postpone it until the next Local and Consent calendar, because the Senate Bill is already over.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you're heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Lewis to explain House Bill 3093.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Madam Speaker, this deals with amending certain reports on contributions.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The -- Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3093? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3093. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3093 by Lewis. Relating to the amendment of certain reports of political contribution and expenditures.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Lewis.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3093. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Kolkhorst to explain House Bill 3099.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you Mrs. Speaker and members, 3099 is legislation that clarifies the role of inspector general --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3099? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3099. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3099 by Kolkhorst. Relating to the office of inspector general of the Department of Public Safety.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3099. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat to explain House Bill 3146.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: Members, this bill authorizes professional the obtain consent to therapy and treatment.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3146? Chair hears none and lays out bill 3146. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3146 by Naishtat. Relating to consent for treatment for chemical dependency in a treatment facility and required training for the facility's intake personnel.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3146. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Farias to explain House Bill 3179.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Madam Chair, members, this bill relates to the contributions to the funds for veterans assistance.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3179? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3179. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3179 by Farias. Relating to contributions to the fund for veterans' assistance.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Farias.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3179. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Ritter to explain House Bill 3184.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: This is the legislative counsel's annual (inaudible) of local special district's law.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 3184 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate bill 1147. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB1147 by Duncan. Relating to the non-substantive revision of certain local laws concerning special districts, including conforming amendments.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Ritter.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the question occurs on passage to third reading of Senate Bill 1147. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Ritter moves to lay out House Bill 3184 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Davis of Dallas to explain House Bill 3207.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Madam Speaker, members this deals with cemeteries in the City of Dallas.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3207? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3207. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3207 by Davis of Dallas. Relating to the establishment and operation of perpetual care cemeteries by certain organized religious societies and sects in certain populous municipalities.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Davis of Dallas.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on the passage of House Bill 3207 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Elkins to explain House Bill 3246.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: The committee amendment put on in committee.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there any objection? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3246. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3246 by Elkins. Relating to public improvement districts designated by a municipality or county.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: There are two amendments, members. A committee amendment and a Local and Consent Calendar amendment. The Chair lays out the committee amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Callegari.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Elkins to explain the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: It was an amendment put on during the committee process.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The question occurs on -- Is there any objection to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Elkins.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Elkins.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: This is the committee amendment put on that -- the (inaudible) counsel draft.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there any objection to adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Elkins.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3246. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Veasey to explain House Bill 3270.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Members, House Bill 3270 is a clarifying bill aimed to clear up some confusion in the legislation code about --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3270? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3270. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3270 by Veasey. Relating to the list of candidates compiled by a state or a county party chair for a primary election.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Veasey.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3270. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Munoz to complain House Bill 3307. REPRESENTATIVE SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: HB3307 relates to the confidentiality of home address information and appraisal records.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3307? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3307. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3307 by Munoz. Relating to the confidentiality of certain home address information in ad valorem tax appraisal records.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Munoz. REPRESENTATIVE SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3307. Is there objection? Chair hear none. So ordered. Chair hears recognizes Representative Rodriguez to explain House Bill 3309.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill simply allows (inaudible) TxDOT authority to set the maximum weight that moves over state highways, roads, and bridges.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3309? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3309. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3309 by Rodriguez. Relating to the authority to set maximum weights for state highways, roads, and bridges.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Rodriguez.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3309. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat to explain House Bill 3342.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: This clarifies that the state attorney must represent the state in mental health --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3342? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3342. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3342 by Naishtat. Relating to representation of and by the state and joinder of the state in certain mental health proceedings.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3342. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Madden to explain House Bill 3384.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Members, this bill deals with penalties for certain repeat and habitual felonies.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3384? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3384. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3384 by Madden. Relating to the penalties for repeat and habitual felony offenders.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Madden.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3384. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Kolkhorst to explain House Bill 3409.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This is a legislation that brings some extra transparency to the lobbying world during legislative session by requiring --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3409? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3409. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3409 by Kolkhorst. Relating to reporting of changes in lobbying activities during a legislative session.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3409. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Gallego to explain House Bill 3478.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. House Bill 3478 (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Did you want to withdraw from the calendar?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Not at all, Mrs. Speaker. Madam Speaker, I was attempting to explain my bill in fairly good detail, and that would be related punishment for criminal mischief involving cattle, horses, and exotic livestock.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3478? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3478. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3478 by Gallego. Relating to the punishment for criminal mischief involving cattle, horses, and exotic livestock.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3478. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Alvarado to explain House Bill 3547.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Thank you Madam Speaker and members, House Bill 3547 allows cities and counties --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3547? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3547. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3547 by Alvarado. Relating to enforcement by a local government of fire safety standards at certain child care facilities.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Alvarado.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3547. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Smithee to explain House Bill 3570.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN T. SMITHEE: This relates to insurance coverage requirements for certain amusement rides.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3570? Chair hears none. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3570 by Smithee. Relating to insurance coverage requirements for certain amusement rides.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Smithee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN T. SMITHEE: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Bill 3570 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat to lay out House Bill 3616.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: This bill designates October as Disability Awareness Month.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3616? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3616. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3616 by Naishtat. Relating to designating October as Disability History and Awareness Month.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOTT NAISHTAT: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3616. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Carter to explain House Bill 3670. Representative Carter?

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I move to withdraw House Bill 3670 because so the Senate Bill will catch up.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you're heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Eiland to explain House Bill 3674.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: 3674 is landmark legislation that is on unsworn declarations.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3674? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3674. The clerk which are read the bill.

CLERK: HB3674 by Eiland. Relating to the use of unsworn declarations.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Eiland.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3674. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Hochberg to explain House Bill 3708.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Madam Speaker, this bill (inaudible) the early graduation scholarship program substitute --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection of consideration of House Bill 3708? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3708. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3708 by Hochberg. Relating to the Early High School Graduation Scholarship Program and to the funding of certain exemptions from tuition and fees at public institutions of higher education from savings attributable to the program.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Hochberg.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading House Bill 3708. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative to explain House Bill 3814.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Thank you, Mrs. Speaker. This a bill for an existing

(inaudible) in my district.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3814? The Chair hears none and lays out 3814. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3814 by Rodriguez. Relating to certain financial powers and duties of the Travis Creedmoor Municipal Utility District.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Rodriguez.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3814. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Lewis to explain House Bill 3815.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Madam Speaker, this bill allows the hospital district to employ peace officers.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3815? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3815. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3815 by Lewis. Relating to the authority of the Ector County Hospital District to employ and commission peace officers.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Lewis.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Madam Speaker, move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3815. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Geren to explain House Bill 3818.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. 3818 puts a cap on the production fees for the Northern Trinity Groundwater Conservation District.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3818? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3818. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3818 by Geren. Relating to a limitation on production fees on groundwater withdrawals assessed by the Northern Trinity Groundwater Conservation District.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Geren.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3818. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Crownover to explain House Bill 3819.

REPRESENTATIVE MYRS CROWNOVER: 3819 creates a Valencia municipal district.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3819? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3819. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3819 by Crownover. Relating to the creation of the Valencia Municipal Management District No. 1; providing authority to levy an assessment and issue bonds.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Crownover.

REPRESENTATIVE MYRS CROWNOVER: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3819. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Eiland to explain House Bill 3821.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: This bill relates to the temporary board of directors of the Bolivar Yacht Basin Water Control and Improvement District No. 1 of Galveston County.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3821? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3821. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3821 by Eiland. Relating to temporary directors and the continuation in existence of the Bolivar Yacht Basin Water Control and Improvement District No. 1 of Galveston County.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Eiland.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3821. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Zerwas to explain House Bill 3827.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: This bill creates the Fulshear Town Center Management District.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3827? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3827. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3827 by Zerwas. Relating to the creation of the Fulshear Town Center Management District; providing authority to impose and assessment, impose a tax, and issue bonds.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Zerwas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3827. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Hochberg to explain House Bill 3828.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: All right, Madam Chairman, the bill creates the management district in my district, in the Gulfton area.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The there objection to consideration of House Bill 3828? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3828. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3828 by Hochberg. Relating to creation of the Gulfton Municipal Management District; providing authority to impose a tax, levy an assessment, and issue bonds.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Hochberg.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3828. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Marquez to explain House Bill 3831.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, HB3831 creates a Municipal Management District in El Paso.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3831? The Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3831. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3831 by Marquez. Relating to the creation of the Montecillo Municipal Management District No. 1; providing authority to levy an assessment, impose a tax, and issue bonds.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair calls on Representative Marquez.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3831. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Zerwas to explain House Bill 3834.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: This bill creates North Bend County Improvement District No. 1.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3834? If not, the Chair lays out House Bill 3834. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3834 by Zerwas. Relating to the creation of the North Bend County Municipal Management District No. 1; providing authority to levy an assessment, impose a tax, and issue bonds.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Zerwas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3834. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Laubenberg to explain House Bill 3835.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Just adds another judge to the the juvenile court --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3835? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3835. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3835 by Laubenberg. Relating to the Rockwall County Juvenile Board.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Laubenberg.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3835. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Pitts to explain House Bill 3836.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Madam Speaker members, this bill creates --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3836? Chair hears none. Chair lays out House Bill 3836. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3836 by Pitts. Relating to the creation of the Windsor Hills Municipal Management District No. 1; providing authority to levy an assessment, impose a tax, and issue bonds.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Pitts.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3836. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Lavender to explain House Bill 3847.

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: This relates to fixing a local water district.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3847? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3847. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3847 by Lavender. Relating to the Riverbend Water Resources District.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Lavender.

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to House Bill 3847. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Dutton to explain House Bill 3857.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mrs. Speaker, members, this is a local bill that creates a management district in my district.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill 3857? Chair hears none and lays out House Bill 3857. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3857 by Dutton. Relating to the creation of the Near Northside Management District.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Dutton.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 3857. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Marquez to explain House Resolution 304.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: This expresses support for the conservation of Castner Range.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to the committee report on House Resolution 306? The Chair hears none and lays out House Resolution 306. The clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HR306 by Marquez. Expressing support for the conservation of Castner Range.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Marquez.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Resolution 306. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Madden to explain House Bill -- House Concurrent Resolution 42.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Madam Speaker, this deals with DNA testing.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of House Bill -- House Concurrent Resolution 42? Chair hears none and lays out House Concurrent Resolution 42. The clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HCR42 by Madden. Expressing support for the current FBI effort to reevaluate existing policies, standards, and protocols for forensic DNA testing.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Madden.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on passage of House Concurrent Resolution 42 to third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Castro for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Madam Speaker, members, a few weeks ago we laid out Senate Bill 116 and laid it on the table subject to call. And I make a motion now to recommit to it Local Calendar, which is where it came from.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Mr. Guillen?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, I move to postpone HB1443 to the next Local and Consent Calendar.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you're heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, it is the Chair's intent to take lunch until 1:00 o'clock, and then we will begin with third reading on the calendar. So, members, if you have committee announcements bring them to the front. The Chair recognizes Representative Taylor.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY TAYLOR: Thank you Madam Speaker. I move to recommit House Bill 2051 and House Bill 2696 to the Elections Committee.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So moved. Chair announces on third reading and referral the following bills:

CLERK: HR242 by Patrick. In memory of Officer Jillian Michelle Smith of the Arlington Police Department. HR1670 by Bonnen. Urging the government of Turkey to uphold and safeguard religious and human rights of all its citizens without compromise, to grant the Ecumenical Patriarch appropriate international recognition, ecclesiastical succession, and the right to train clergy of all nationalities, and to respect the property rights and human rights of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and all religious and faith traditions.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative McClendon for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE RUTH JONES MCCLENDON: Than k you, Madam Speaker. This is for the members of the Committee on Rules and Resolutions. Rather than meeting upon adjournment, at the reading and referral of bills, we will meet upon recess, for lunch. So as soon as we recess for lunch, we will go down to the Ag Museum and have our meeting, the Committee on Rules and Resolution.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Marquez for announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, the Committee on County Affairs will be meeting today while the House is in session at 1:30 --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Marquez.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Thank you, I'm going to try this again. I request permission for the Committee on County Affairs to meet while the House is in session at 1:30 p.m. today, in 3W15, to consider pending items.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Following announcements. The clerk will read the announcements.

CLERK: The Committee on Veterans Affairs will meet at first adjournment on May the 3rd, 2011, at desk No. 15. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business. The Committee on Rules and Resolutions will meet at first adjournment on May 3rd, 2011, at 1W.14 at the Agriculture Museum. This will be a formal meeting to set a congratulatory and memorial calendar. The Committee on County Affairs will meet at 1:30 p.m. on May the 3rd, 2011, at 3W.15. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending items.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, are there any further announcements? If not, Representative Marquez moves that the House stand adjourned until 1:00 p.m. today.

(The House stands adjourned).

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The House will come to order. Members, please register. Quorum is present. Representative McClendon asks unanimous consent for those members granted leave of absence on the previous legislative day be excused on this legislative day. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative McClendon moves to suspend all necessary rules to consider the Local and Consent Calendar Bills on third reading. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative McClendon asks unanimous consent to use the vote on the first record vote for all bills, and for HR306 and HCR42; with the understanding that a member may record a vote on any vote with the Journal Clerk. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair lays out House Bill 114 and the clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB114 by McClendon. Relating to designating April as Minority Cancer Awareness Month.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative McClendon.

REPRESENTATIVE RUTH JONES MCCLENDON: This bill just designates April as Minority Cancer Awareness Month.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 114. It's a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 144 ayes and 0 nays, 1 present not voting; House Bill 114 is finally passed. The Chair lays out the following bills on third reading and final passage to be passed by a record vote just recorded on House Bill 114. The clerk will read the bills.

CLERK: HB554 by Howard of Davis. Relating to the civil service status of emergency medical services personnel in certain municipalities. HB557 by Deshotel. Relating to the additional of a county freight rail district. HB592 by Pitts. Relating to certain counties are not required to operate juvenile justice alternative education program. HB663 by Chisum. Relating to certain nonrefundable application fees by the Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education. SB398 by Duncan. Relating to the Board of Hospital Managers in Lubbock County Hospital District. SB410 by Eltife. Relating to the name and powers of the Red River Development Authority. HB1113 by Raymond. Relating to the sentencing hearing or deferred adjudication hearing and conditions of community supervision for defendants convicted of certain offenses involving controlled substances. HB1199 by Gallego. Relating to the penalty for certain intoxication assaults. HB1224 by Reynolds. Relating to the expulsion of public school student who commits certain criminal acts involving a computer, computer network, or computer system owned by or operated on behalf of a school district. SB483 by Harris. Relating to the powers and duties of criminal law magistrates In Tarrant County. HB1253 by Smithee. Relating to certain modifications of a health benefit plan. HB1291 by Hochberg. Relating to the payment of tolls for highway toll projects. HB1314 by Raymond. Relating to the operation of the 111th District Court. HB1345 by Veasey. Relating to the statute of limitations on prosecution of the offenses of kidnapping and aggravated kidnapping of a minor. HB1401 by Laubenberg. Relating to who may participate in certain local option elections to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages. HB1402 by Guillen. Relating to the applicability of the law on the consequences of a criminal conviction to law enforcement officer license holders and applicants. HB1615 by Brown. Relating to the administration of medications to children in certain facilities; providing a criminal penalty. HB1622 by Menendez. Relating to suits to enjoin gang activity that constitutes a public nuisance. HB1643 by Zerwas. Relating to the duration of a development agreement governing land in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of certain municipalities. HB1789 by Farias. Relating to the payment of state funds directly to an entity that conducts a primary election under contract in certain counties. HB1805 by Huberty. Relating to a public school student's eligibility for a public education grant to attend another public school. HB1830 by Naishtat. Relating to the method of delivery of certain notices by statutory probate court associate judges. HB1959 by Thompson. Relating to appeal of the certification of an area's wet or dry status. SB1258 by Duncan. Relating to the disposal of demolition waste from abandoned or unused buildings in certain areas. HB2028 by Hartnett. Relating to an additional fee for filing civil cases in certain Rockwall County courts. HB2069 by Naishtat. Relating to the authority of a pharmacist to dispense up to a 90-day supply of dangerous drugs and accelerate refills. SB428 by Huffman. Relating to notice to a judgment debtor of the filing of a foreign judgment. HB2189 by Elkins. Relating to the regulation of hand fishing. HB2256 by Phillips. Relating to abating or deferring the suspension of the revocation of the license issued by the Department of Public Safety for victims of identity theft. HB2265 by Ritter. Relating to a county audit of a hotel regarding the hotel occupancy tax. HB2280 by Eiland. Relating to the composition of the permanent advisory committee to advise the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regarding the implementation an ad valorem tax exemption for pollution control property. HB2310 by Miller. Relating to appointment of bailiffs for the district courts in Comal, Hays, and Caldwell Counties. HB2312 by Coleman. Relating to the creation of a sickle cell disease program. HB2313 by Coleman. Relating to certain notice requirements for municipalities and counties under the open meetings law. HB2370 by Dukes. Relating to go certain notice to applicants to provide care under the permanency care assistance program. HB2387 by Menendez. Relating to the selection, compensation and duties of the general counsel to an appraisal district. HB2393 by Sarah Davis of Harris. Relating to a request by the owner of an ownership interest in a domestic entity that the interest be uncertificated. HB2422 by Thompson. Relating to the procedure for providing final copy of a decree of a dissolution of a marriage to a party who waives service of process. HB2471 by Phillips. Relating to limiting the civil liability of certain persons who obtain or provide medical care and treatment for certain animals. HB2490 by Solomon. Relating to the regulation of certain metal dealers; providing criminal penalties. HB2516 by Alvarado. Relating to the appeal of an indefinite suspension of a municipal firefighter or police officer. HB2519 by Kuempel. Relating to the regulation of vehicle auctions. HB2628 by Branch. Relating to the posting of signs in school crossing zones regarding the prohibited use of a wireless communication device while operating a motor vehicle. SB1269 by Wentworth. Relating to transportation, lodging, and meals offered to and accepted by public servants. HB2630 by Branch. Relating to the formal recognition and administration of The Texas A&M University System Health Science Center. HB2643 by Hamilton. Relating to safety standards for elevators, escalators and related equipment. HB2711 by Thompson. Relating to the sealing of the records of juveniles who are the victims of human trafficking and have been adjudicated to have engaged in certain delinquent conduct. HB2727 by Thompson. Relating to the regulation by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation of the application of eyelash extensions and private beauty culture schools; providing a criminal penalty. HB2758 by Pena. Relating to mandatory emergency alert systems at institutions of higher education. HB2770 by Smith of Harris. Relating to the powers and duties of navigation districts, port authorities and certain municipalities. HB2790 by Hunter. Relating to the operation of a golf cart or utility vehicle on a public highway in certain counties. HB2847 by Madden. Relating to the use of video teleconferencing systems in certain criminal proceedings. HB1851 by Mallory Caraway. Relating to the deferral of certain surcharge payments for military personal deployed outside of the continental United States. HB2853 by John Davis. Relating to tax increment financing. HB2911 by Branch. Relating to guaranteed student loans and alternative education loans. HB2978 by Hunter. . Relating to the applicability of open meetings requirements to certain meetings of the governing board of a county hospital or county hospital authority. HB2981 by Hunter. Relating to the operation on a highway or street of a motor vehicle that is drawing a boat or personal watercraft in or on which a person is riding; providing a penalty. HB2999 by Lewis. Relating to a fixed tuition rate program for certain students who transfer to a state university after completing an associate degree program. HB3076 by Gallego. Relating to the rate of hotel occupancy tax in certain counties. HB3033 by Naishtat. Relating to retirement under public retirement systems for employees of certain municipalities. HB3093 by Lewis. Relating to the amendment of certain reports of political contributions and expenditures. HB3099 by Kolkhorst. Relating to the office of inspector general of the Department of Public Safety. HB3146 by Naishtat. Relating to consent for treatment for chemical dependency in a treatment facility and required training for the facility's intake personnel. HB3179 by Farias. Relating to contributions to the fund for veterans' assistance. SB1147 by Duncan. Relating to the non-substantive revision of certain local laws concerning special districts, including conforming amendments. HB3207 by Davis of Dallas. Relating to the establishment and operation of perpetual care cemeteries by certain organized religious societies and sects in certain populous municipalities. HB3246 by Elkins.. Relating to public improvement districts designated by a municipality or county. HB3270 by Veasey. Relating to the list of candidates compiled by a state or county party chair for a primary election. HB3307 by Munoz. Relating to the confidentiality of certain home address information in ad valorem tax appraisal records. HB3309 by Rodriguez. Relating to the authority to set maximum weights for state highways, roads, and bridges. HB3343 by Naishtat. Relating to the disclosure of certain attorney's fees and expenses paid by the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association. HB3384 by Madden.. Relating to the penalties for repeat and habitual felony offenders. HB3409 by Kolkhorst. Relating to reporting of changes in lobbying activities during a legislative session. HB3478 by Gallego. Relating to the punishment for criminal mischief involving cattle, horses, and exotic livestock. HB3547 by Alvarado. Relating to enforcement by a local government of fire safety standards at certain child-care facilities. HB3570 by Smithee. Relating to insurance coverage requirements for certain amusement rides. HB3616 by Naishtat. Relating to designating October as Disability History and Awareness Month. HB3674 by Eiland. Relating to the use of an unsworn declaration. HB3708 by Hochberg. Relating to the Early High School Graduation Scholarship program and to the funding of certain exemptions from tuition and fees at public institutions of higher education from savings attributable to the program. HB3814 by Rodriguez. Relating to certain financial powers and duties of the Travis-Creedmoor Municipal Utility District. HB3815 by Lewis. Relating to the authority of the Ector County Hospital District to employ and commission peace officers. HB3818 by Geren. Relating to a limitation on production fees on groundwater withdrawals assessed by the Northern Trinity Groundwater Conservation District. H3819 by Crownover. Relating to the creation of the Valencia Municipal Management District No. 1; providing authority to levy an assessment and issue bonds. HB3821 Alvarado. Relating to temporary directors and the continuation in existence of the Bolivar Yacht Basin Water Control and Improvement District No. 1 of Galveston County HB3827 by Zerwas. Relating to the creation of the Fulshear Town Center Management District; providing authority to impose an assessment, impose a tax, and issue bonds. HB3828 by Hochberg. Relating to the creation of the Gulfton Area Municipal Management District; providing authority to impose a tax, levy an assessment, and issue bonds. HB3831 by Marquez. Relating to the creation of the Montecillo Municipal Management District No. 1; providing authority to levy an assessment, impose a tax, and issue bonds. HB3834 by Zerwas. Relating to the creation of North Fort Bend County Improvement District No. 1; providing authority to levy an assessment, impose a tax, and issue bonds. HB3835 by Laubenberg. Relating to the creation of North Fort Bend County Improvement District No. 1; providing authority to levy an assessment, impose a tax, and issue bonds. HB3836 by Pitts. Relating to the creation of the Windsor Hills Municipal Management District No. 1; providing authority to levy an assessment and issue bonds. HB3847 by Lavender. Relating to the Riverbend Water Resources District. HB3857 by Dutton. Relating to the creation of the Near Northside Management District.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair declares those bills just read by the clerk, as well as HR306 and HCR42, to be finally passed by the record vote recorded on House Bill 114; with the understanding that a member may record a vote with the Journal Clerk. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following bills on first reading and referral to committee: Back up. Representative Solomons moves that the first reading and referral of bills be moved to the end of today's calendar. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, we're about to proceed to the regular calendar. The Chair announces the signing of the following in the presence of the House:

CLERK: SB646, SB539, SB785.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 2608. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2608 by Harper-Brown. Relating to the continuation and function of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Harper-Brown. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Thank you, members. This is the TDHCA Sunset Bill. I believe we have a couple of amendments.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Members, this amendment simply clarifies the amendment we put on yesterday, and it makes sure it doesn't pertain to our funds and extends the date of implementation. I think it's acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you heard the amendment. Are there any objections? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Turner.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Turner.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you, Mrs. Speaker and members. On the disaster section, it says that the housing authority will be responsible for housing, and the Office of Rural Affairs will be responsible for the infrastructure. This amendment simply says that the two groups will work in conjunction with our county judges and mayors of the affected region. And I believe it is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there objection to consideration of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 26 -- Back up. Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Bohac.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Bohac.

REPRESENTATIVE DWAYNE BOHAC: Mrs. Speaker , members, this amendment seeks to address the high density tax credit housing in communities and counties with a population over one million. The amendment simply prevents developments from being located within two linear miles of each other in each calendar year. And it is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. Bohac sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 2608? If. not, the Chair recognizes Representative Harper-Brown to close. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Thank you, Madam speaker. Members, this is a really --

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Represent ative Chisum, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Does the lady yield? REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I do yield.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Do you yield? REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Do I need to get my book out?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Well, I think you've done a fabulous job on this bill, and I'm glad to get this. But is there anything about red lights on here? REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: No, I don't think so, Representative Chisum. But you might watch some of the other bills. Thank you Madam Speaker. Members, I just wanted to take a moment to thank the Sunset staff once again for an excellent job, and I want to thank all of you for being respectful, and I believe that even with these amendments, even though there was some confusion over some of them, it is still a good bill and I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the question occurs on the final passage of HB2608. It is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 144 ayes, 5 nays; House Bill 2608 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading Senate Bill 655. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB655 by Hagar. Relating to the abolition of the Railroad Commission of Texas and the creation of the Texas Oil and Gas Commission, and the transfer of the powers and duties of the Railroad Commission to the Texas Oil and Gas Commission.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Keffer.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES L. KEFFER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This is the Sunset -- new Texas Oil and Gas Commission Sunset, I guess it's Railroad Commission Sunset, soon to be Oil and Gas. We have a few amendments.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by King of Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative King of Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Mrs. Speaker, members. Members, if I could get your attention. Yesterday, late in the day, I put on a amendment on that was intended to fix what I think was a systemic problem that the Railroad Commissioners have been forced to live under. And if you can imagine being three people running an organization that can never sit down and say what are you thinking about this, or brainstorm or discuss, unless they do it in a public hearing, during a formal setting where they're taking evidence. It's just a impossible way to run an organization. I attempted to do an amendment that would let them do what a lot of our agencies do, is go into executive session to discuss matters, to try to correct that. It wouldn't put them under the open government code where we had have specific procedures for that. I think it was one of those things that seemed like a good idea at the time, but after discussing with you and thinking through it through the night, I think it is the wrong fix for a problem that does need fixing. And so, with your permission, I would like to withdraw that amendment. We'll have to vote to do that. So that I don't want anybody ever saying that any member of this House ever voted for anything to allow an agency to do something in secret. And my concern is that someone would misconstrue this and say that we voted to do something in secret, and I don't want to let that happen. So, with your permission, I would like to adopt this amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: For what purpose, Mr. Turner?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. King, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: I certainly do, for questions.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Represen tative King, I just wanted to thank you. I appreciate -- I know we had a dialogue running yesterday, and I appreciate your willingness.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: You were one of the ones that is gave me cause for concern.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I'm just a little person in the process. You know, thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you very much.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, Mr. King offers up an amendment. It is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So moved.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Mrs. Speaker, could I ask that the discussion in laying out that bill be reduced to writing and entered in the journal for laying out that amendment? reprensentative bev: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none so ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Keffer.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES L. KEFFER: Madam Speaker, I do want to thank Representative King for that long thought on that. That's why we just didn't slip it in, or put it in without conversation yesterday. And it is a problem that we need try to continue to work on, for the Commission. But none of us want to see it in our next campaign. And I do thank Mr. King for doing that. Appreciate it.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, is there anyone wanting to speak on, for or against the following amendment? The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Turner.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you, Madam Speaker and members. This is the amendment that deals with the study of the tax consequences of deductions and consolidated federal income tax issues. We have revised the amendment so that it doesn't necessarily direct an outcome, but it asks the agency to take a look at it and to report back to the House, the Senate, the Railroad Commission, the Public Utility Commission; by December 1st of 2012. It also redrafts my legislative district to make it consistent. Just checking to see it -- Did you hear me? No, that's okay. No. Just on the deductions and the consolidated tax. It is a study and I move adoption, and I believe it is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, Mr. Turner sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Strama.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Strama.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This amendment is actually a technical correction to an amendment we adopted yesterday. We're just rolling it into the engrossed version of the bill. It does make a substantive change in that it provides that it has to be 180 days notice rather than a 30 days, before a pipeline operator must relocate a salt water pipeline using existing rights of way. Other than that, it is just using the right-of-way authority of the Transportation Commission. Again, what we were originally doing here is enabling pipelines to go on existing right-of-way to transport salt water to and from these wells, to avoid the truck traffic that is costing a lot of money for the maintenance of roads. And, frankly, those trucks cost a lot of money to the (inaudible). So it's a win/win, and the amendment is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, Mr. Strama sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Now, members, is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against Senate Bill 655? If not, the Chair recognizes Representative Keffer to close.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES L. KEFFER: Thank you for the debate yesterday. I close and move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the question occurs on final passage of Senate Bill 65. It is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Representative Miller voting aye. Mr. Aliseda voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 148 ayes, 0 nays; Senate Bill 655 is finally passed. The Chair recognizes Representative Legler on House Bill 2494. Representative Legler? Chair lays out House Bill 2494. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2494 by Legler. Relating to the recovery of fraudulently obtained unemployment benefits.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Legler.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I move to postpone House Bill 2494 until the end of postpone business of today's calendar.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So moved. The Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 90. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB90 by Cook. Relating to the minimum age and education requirements necessary to obtain a hardship license.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Cook.

REPRESENTATIVE BYRON COOK: This is the bill that we passed yesterday regarding education of hardship license. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 90? It is a record vote, members. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? There being a 125 ayes, 13 nays; House Bill 90 is finally passed. The Chair -- Excuse me. The Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 123. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB123 by Veasey. Relating to an adult diabetes education program in certain county hospital systems and hospital districts.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Veasey.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Members, this is the bill we passed yesterday dealing with the adult diabetes education programs in large county hospitals and hospital districts, I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the question -- Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 123? The Chair hears none and the question occurs on final passage of House Bill 123. It is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? 147 ayes, 2 nays; House Bill 123 is finally passed. Members, the Senate Bill to HB956 is over and eligible. The Chair lays out House Bill 956. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB956 by Marquez. Relating to the State Fire Marshal's investigation of a firefighter who dies in the line of duty or in connection with an on-duty incident.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the Senate Bill companion to House Bill 956 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out the Senate Bill 396. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB396 by Deuell. Relating to the state fire marshal's investigation of the death of a firefighter who dies in the line of duty or in connection with an on-duty incident.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Marquez.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members SB396 and its companion, HB956, is a simple bill that ensures that a proper investigation be conducted after a firefighter's death occurs in connection with an on-duty incident. Current law gives the State Fire Marshal authority to investigate the line-of-duty death for firefighters in connection the firefighting fatality. The goal of these investigations is to identify factors contributing to the firefighter's death and to use that information to prevent future occurrences. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The question occurs -- Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against or on House Bill 396? The Chair hears none so the question occurs on final passage of House Bill -- excuse me Senate Bill 396. It is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 145 ayes, 0 nays -- excuse me, Senate Bill 396 is finally passed. Representative Marquez moves to lay House Bill 956 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. House Bill -- Chair lays out House Bill 255. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB255 by Hildebrand. Relating to the enforcement of tax laws providing criminal penalty.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 255 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 934. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB934 by Williams. Relating to the enforcement of tax laws providing a criminal penalty.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Hildebrand.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Thank you Madam Speaker and members, this the companion to House Bill 255, which is comptrollers criminal enforcement bill. Just updates and reforms that statute. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against or on Senate Bill 934? Back up, members. We have an amendment. The amendment is withdrawn. Is there anyone wishing to speak on for or against Senate Bill 934? If not, the question occurs on final passage of Senate Bill 934. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed -- The ayes have it and Senate Bill 934 is finally passed. Passed to third reading. Representative Hildebrand moves to lay House Bill 255 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2334. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2334 by Hardcastle. Relating to the operation by the Department of Agriculture Programs for economic development, and the marketing and promotion of agricultural and other products grown, processed or produced in this state.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Hardcastle.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, the Texas Department of Agriculture is charged with promoting economic growth in rural areas and generating markets for products grown, processed and produced in this state. TDA has an excellent track record with this, and this little bill allows them to charge fees for some of those things they do to make up what we cut them in House Bill 1 and Appropriations, and I believe the Senate Bill is over.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 2334 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 1086. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB1086 by Estes. Relating to the operation by the Department of Agriculture programs for rural economic development and the marketing promotion of agricultural and other products grown, processed or produced in this state.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Hardcastle.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Madam Speaker, members, the Senate Bill is worded identical, and it will just give the Texas Department of Agriculture the ability to charge some fees on the programs that they already do, and they've been very successful at. And I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against Senate Bill 1086? If not, the question occurs on passage to third reading of Senate Bill 1086. All those in favor say aye. A record vote has been requested. A record vote is granted. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Representative Hardcastle voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 133 ayes, 14 nays; Senate Bill 1086 is passed to third reading. Representative Hardcastle moves to lay House Bill 2334 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1250. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1250 by Frullo. Relating to the use of facsimile signatures for certain documents involving certain municipalities.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Frullo.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Madam Chairman, I wish to postpone House Bill 1250 until Friday, May 6th at 9:00 a.m.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business, on second leading, HJR 122. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HJR122 by Legler. Proposing a constitutional amendment authorizing garnishment of wages for the recovery of fraudulently obtained unemployment benefits.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The Chair recognizes Representative Legler to explain the bill. Representative Alonzo raises a point of order. Under Rule 4, Section 32 C1, on the grounds that the bill analysis of HJR122 is substantially materially misleading. The Chair has reviewed the bill, and the bill analysis, and finds that the bill analysis complies with Rule 4, Section 32, and is not substantially and materially misleading. The point of order is respectfully overruled. The Chair recognizes Representative Legler.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: For what purpose, Mrs. Davis?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Parliamentary inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I'm wondering if we I understand there might be a database point of order that the parliamentarian might have available that members could get a copy of, so that we will understand how your rulings are going to be based on precedent.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Our ruling will be put into the journal.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I'm now thinking -- I'm talking about something else. Parliamentary inquiry, is there a database or reference report that you-all have established at the parliamentarian office to the determine precedential point of order?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The parliamentarian's office has the journal of past rulings available, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: And is that available to the members, so that we might save the body time if we have access to how they're going to rule, based on some previous precedence?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Each ruling is based on the unique facts of each --

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Parliamentary inquiry. Is there a database to these points already been established, or is there not one?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: We keep a list of all the points of order that are raised during session.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Is that information available to members, so that we may have it as a reference point as to how your rulings are; so we can anticipate on whether or not we want to bring a point of order forward or not?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The identical items are placed in the journal.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Is that a database that you have available? Is it available to us in a format that you-all use to determine points of order, so that we can utilize it, as members? Wouldn't that be subject to public information?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: We're certainly willing to talk to you about whatever we have, and what you might need. Representative Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Simply waiting on Representative Legler.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Solomon.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Solomon.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Thank you Madam Speaker and members, I had yesterday a conversation with Representative Legler about his constitutional amendment, and suggested to him that if you're going to do this that in fact, your constitutional amendment didn't quite -- wasn't quite as clear as I think it should have been; involving the requirement of some sort of court order about the recovery of fraudulently obtained unemployment benefit. I just didn't think it was as well -- It wasn't meant to be disrespectful to anybody that drew it up, and it may be correct. And it just didn't make sense to me. And we -- I asked legislative counsel to come up with an amendment where it was clear that any kind of enforcement, if we're going to raise it to this level, it has to be by court order, or there wouldn't be any issues about how it read. So the amendment, as I filed, sort of insisted that it be the enforcement of a court order recovery of fraudulently obtained unemployment benefits. I may never get to that, but it would have to be at least through a court order, not through TWC or anyone just assessing, just to go after someone for whatever it is. Didn't want TWC to be the sole judge, jury and executioner on that. That it would have to go through a court and have to be a finding that a fraudulently -- fraudulent -- recovery of fraudulently obtained unemployment benefits, not over payment of benefits, but it had to be a fraudulent situation. So the court would have to find that fraudulent. So I was trying to help clarify Mr. Legler's constitutional amendment to ensure that a court would have to rule whether it was fraudulent and not just an over payment.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Certainly .

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Would you yield? Mr. Solomons -- Chairman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Represen tative Solomon, I appreciate what you're doing. I guess just a few questions, though. I mean there are other cases where you're going to get a court order, and let's say on something that somebody has done fraudulently. Is there any reason that you can think of why it would be more important to put this in the constitution, versus a court order on some fraudulent allegation that's been found by the court, and going through the regular judicial process of collection process; have you looked at it?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Since it goes to the garnishment of wages, and we ensured in the Constitution that up to this point, as Chairman Oliveira and others have mentioned, if it elevates to the point of being a constitutional matter, that it was under the section for court order, and they tried, I think, when they did it, the idea was I wanted to ensure that it's something similar. You know, when you go for court order of child support or spousal maintenance, it's part of the divorce proceedings or whatever proceeding it is for family law, and it basically goes -- and it's usually part of that. In this case, I would think that you would have to have TWC bring a cause of action and go through that process. And if the person wanted to actually get it paid, fine. But if it resulted in a final situation where the court order that your wages be garnished wanted to ensure in the Constitution, and I think Mr. Legler has expressed that, then it has to be from a court order that there was a finding of fraud. And, because of that, since it hasn't been paid, that in fact you could have your wages garnished. As far as the process, I'm amenable to anything. I just think that if you're going to do this we just wanted to ensure in the Constitution that it has to be by a court order, a court finding, that there was fraud.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Right. And the only thing I'm saying, what would be the argument, including any court order, where there was a finding of fraud on any allegation, allowing putting that in the Constitution across the board?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: That's another philosophical argument. I'm just looking at Mr. Legler's particular amendment. And I was just trying to -- I don't know if this amendment will even pass, but I didn't want it to be incorrect in how it was laid out and then have a problem later on. So I thought by trying to do this it was at least assessing that if this body decides to do it, or if it becomes law for some reason, even with the Senate, that it was at least ensured that the the way it was worded it would be that it had to be by court order.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Right. I understand.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Is there anyone else that wants to speak on, for, or against the Solomon amendment? If not, the question occurs on the adoption of the Solomon amendment. It's acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Legler on HJR122, as amended.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Thank you members, Madam Speaker. Exactly. And I want to make sure to clear it up, that is my intent and total intent to make sure that the court issues that order, and it's got to be a court issued order, not TWC. And I'm glad Chairman Solomon brought that up to me and said wait, it looks like it could be a little questionable. And I do not -- I want to make sure everybody understands, I do not want there to be any question on there to allow TWC to do this on their own. I want it to be a court.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Mr. Turner , for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Yes, I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Represen tative Legler, I guess concerned -- I'm having -- explain to me why the present system, through the criminal court or through a civil lawsuit, are not adequate to address the problem, rather than placing it in the State Constitution.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Well, one of the things is it adds another additional tool to their box. Another thing, what they do is they are basically giving a junction or a judgment against somebody, which is pretty hard to collect on sometimes.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: What makes this category of cases different from another category of cases? Maybe I didn't hear you. I'm just concerned why we would place this category of cases in the State Constitution, verses placing a separate category of cases. I mean, I'm opposed to anyone doing anything fraudulently across the board, and I don't think any of us are condoning that. I'm just trying to see why we would amend the State Constitution to put this category of cases in our constitution, when the criminal justice system or the civil litigation system would also address the same problem.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Basically, what I believe, number one, this is another tool. Number two, this comes across as a point where as the fraudulent -- if they determine fraudulent, okay, then this is actually money that was sent in to the Texas Workforce Commission Fund, and then they were actually taking away from everybody's funds in the system.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: How much are we talking about?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: From 2004 to 2010 the Texas Workforce Commission detected -- yesterday I gave a lower number because it was only lesser years, I can do it again now, but $75,192,217 in fraudulently obtained unemployment benefit payments through internal investigations and legal proceedings.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: From 2004 to 2010?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Last year. In calendar year 2010, TWC detected fraudulent payments in the amount of $13,822,322. And 2010, Texas Workforce Commission had criminal prosecution recoveries of $3,915,000.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: That is by their interpretation. That's not going through -- to any court system trying to collect, or anything like that. That's not based on judgments, that's based on their internal documents?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: In criminal prosecution they recovered $3,915,000.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: In the document that I'm looking at, it says that TWC detected fraudulent unemployment benefits in the amount of -- let's say $14 million, but TWC recovered in criminal prosecutions of -- right at 3.94 million dollars. Are those the same numbers?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Those are the same numbers, correct.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. Why should we assume that allowing garnishments is going to improve on these numbers one way or the other?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Well, I believe, a couple of reasons why, because they do know that we can obtain this money from the garnishment of wages. If the people of Texas agree to this, they will actually be able to garnish their wages. The Court will say, a judge, the court will say you have to pay an X number of dollars back out of your pay check. And so, in turn, I feel that they feel, and I feel, that the court system will -- that would -- they will have more money coming back, either through garnishment of their wages, or more as if they understand the garnishment of wages as more of a recovery act on their own.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Do you have any idea of the average amount per person that we're talking about?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: No, I do not.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Any idea of how many people we're talking about?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: No, I do not.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And is this something that is being asked for by employers, or is this something that is being asked for by the agency?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I asked -- I brought this bill up because they asked me to carry this bill.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: The agency did?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: The Chairman of my -- the committee asked me to add this bill.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And who is the Chairman?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: John Davis.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. He asked you? Okay. If Representative Davis asked you to not bring it at this point, would you pull it back?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: No. Because I like the bill. And you know me enough, I would not take the bill if I don't think it is right.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I understand. We differ. The only thing is that there are only two areas that are included in our state constitution, child support and spousal maintenance support. And this would represent another element added to our state constitution. And that's where I am philosophically opposed to what we're doing here.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Representative Turner, I definitely understand your feeling, and I fought with those same ideas for a very long time myself.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Let me just add, I'm opposed to taking this mechanism. I am in favor, Representative Legler, of beefing up any legislative and criminal sources we need in order to cut down on this problem. I just don't believe that the the State constitution allowing garnishment is the right way to do it. That's my concern.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I understand. I do understand your concern.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: You are welcome.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: Madam Speaker, would the gentleman yield? I think he will. Just asking.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Sorry, we weren't paying attention. What could we do for you?

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: I was asking if the gentleman would yield.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I yield for questions.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The gentleman yields, Mr. Strama.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: Thank you. Thank you, Representative Legler, for the dialogue we've been having the last 24 hours about this bill. I think you and I see the same. None of us support the defrauding the unemployment insurance trust. I just want to make sure we have a common understanding of these numbers, and you and I have been going round and round about these numbers. I just got off the phone with the Workforce Commission and asked them about the discrepancy between the 13.8 million that they detected in fraudulent unemployment benefits in 2010, and the 3.9 that they have recovered from successful criminal prosecution. And let's see if we have a common understanding of these numbers. The 13.8 detected would not be susceptible to wage garnishment under the amendment you just accepted from Representative Solomon, because that isn't money that has been through the adjudication process that Representative Solomons amendment requires. Is that your understanding as well?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: And that is my understanding of the entire bill in the first place.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: Right. I agree. But what is subject to wage garnishment is funds that have been adjudicated to have been fraudulently obtained in a criminal prosecution that the Workforce Commission has shared with both of us today, that they recovered 3.9 million of that type of money last year, in 2010.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: What we don't know, which I asked them on Monday, which they didn't have it handy. And I asked them right now, they didn't have at the last minute, is how much has been criminally prosecuted successfully, but not recovered? It's clearly less than 13.8 million, probably something more than 3.9 million; but can we agree the difference between the amount of money they successfully criminally prosecuted but failed to recover is the amount of money that would be subject to wage garnishment under your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Probably and possibly.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: Failed to recover through the criminal proceedings?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Right. And we had, though, that other figure in there, the $8 million.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Representa tive Sheffield raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. Point of order is well taken and sustained. Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against HJR122? Representative Oliveira to speak against.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE O. OLIVEIRA: Mr. Spea ker, members, Madam Speaker, members, thank you for the opportunity to address this constitutional provision. Yesterday I talked about the history of this constitutional protection that's in our constitution, that the framers put in there. And I reminded you-all about this being really a part of a philosophy that made up our great state, that we were going to take care of the workers' paycheck, we were going take care of the earnings of the farmers and others; and that was done. And that's why you don't have garnishment of wages like you do in other states for credit cards and other things. What I see here is what we have heard before a couple of times this session, is we're using a sledge hammer to crack a egg. If you can't get this money through the criminal justice system, with people facing prison time, and you can't get this money because now what's going happen, as soon as that employer, as Representative Strama said yesterday, gets one of those checks that somebody may have committed fraud, they're going to be fired. And then you're not going to collect money. And now, even though I supported Representative Solomons' amendment, it's made it more expensive now for TWC to go try and collect. Now they have to file a proceeding in court, they have to pay legal fees, they have to pay court costs, they have to try and get somebody served. It simply doesn't do what we want it to do, even though it may look politically popular. Now I understand that big business wants this, but I can guarantee you that small and medium business does not want to have this chore put on them. They do not want to have to be garnishing wages. In 1983 and '85, when we passed the legislation that I authored to deal with the garnishment of wages for child support for court ordered child support, the one concern that the business community raised over and over was are you putting this mandate on us to collect something that you should be collecting? Why are you making the business community use their time, their payroll people, to do this collection work? That was the problem then. It took years for the business community to finally accept that this was a good thing, because when it came to our children and collecting child support, it worked. And the Attorney General's Office has done an incredible job now collecting billions as a result of that legislation for the children of our great state. Now again there may be other proposals this session, abuse our Constitution, put an unfunded mandate on business, to try to collect something that we have plenty of remedies for already. Please don't do what is just politically expedient. Think about those business people out there. And let me bring up one more thing we all know that over 3 million people's Social Security numbers, identification, and everything was out and available for everybody to see. Think how many wrong cases are going to be brought, because somebody else's Social Security number, somebody else's birthday, somebody else's information was used. Think how that's going to work. What if it's you or somebody in your business that gets this letter? We don't need to do this to our fellow Texans. We don't need to run this risk and have innocent Texans be subject to this. We all know those horror stories out there about identity theft, we heard them from our constituents, we've heard them from others. We know it's going happen. There will be people that will be mistakenly identified as being the culprit and they will have problems and they will lose jobs and we won't collect any more money. It really doesn't to what it needs to do, and I respectfully ask to you vote no. It just simply isn't the right to thing to do. And, again, I'll repeat, we're really using a sledgehammer to crack an egg and it isn't going to do any good, it's just going to give us bad scrambled eggs.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Mr. Eiland to speak against HJR122.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Mrs. Speaker , members, what I know of Mr. Legler's amendment and his constitutional amendment has brought against, I think that we should not pass it. And let me give you one example why: In the Dallas Morning News and the Houston Chronicle, over the last couple of days, they've talked about a man that is in my district, Mr. Anthony Grays. Anthony Grays was convicted wrongfully of murder and spent 18 years behind bars. Twelve of those years were on death row. Last October he got out during the retrial, when the State dropped the charges, because they cited unethical conduct, they cited pressure on witnesses, et cetera. They dropped the charges, and in October he went free. Guess what happened when he got free? He went to Prairie View A&M and he gave a speech. He earned $250 for giving the speech. Guess what happened to the money? It was garnished by the Attorney General's office, because he is behind on child support for when he was on death row wrongfully. And the State has not paid had the $80,000 under the laws that we have passed. That's the type of thing that can happen when you put things in the Texas Constitution that allow for no wiggle room and no alternatives. The Attorney General's Office and the Comptroller are saying we have to do this. Well, I know Mr. Legler's constitutional amendment and his bill are brought in good faith. We don't have to do this and we shouldn't do this because who knows what else could happen that has happened to this wrongfully convicted person who had his wages garnished by the State wrongfully. So please vote no on this constitutional amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Is there anyone else wishing to speak on, for, or against HJR122? If not, Representative Legler is recognized to close.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Madam Speaker, members, I take this bill very dear to my heart. Am I saying that our court systems and Craig Eiland -- I know we're not talking about death row, I understand that. Are our court systems perfect? No, they're not. Are they the best we have in the world? Yes, they are. Nothing will ever be perfect, but our court systems are the best that we have in this world and I have traveled this world over. What we're talking about is a tool that will help forget the funds that are basically coming from the hard working Texans, and that's what they do, they come from the hard working Texans that work in our great state. It protects them from enrichment of the scrupulous individuals by providing Texas Workforce Commission with an additional tool for the recovery of fraudulently obtained benefits. That's why I believe --

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: For what purpose, Mr. Hildebrand?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: I have a question.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Do you yield, Representative Legler?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I do.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Represe ntative Legler, I want to understand exactly what you're doing and why you're doing it. First question is, does the provision already exist in statute, in the criminal justice statute, to prosecute folks that do this on unemployment?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I can -- Let me tell you how -- There is statute, a way to prosecute, yes, there is. They did a judgment, basically.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: And does it include garnishment or it does not?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: It does not.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Okay. What I'm concerned about is we're talking -- I think you've got a legitimate issue that we need to address. What I'm concerned about is the Constitution when maybe a better method of addressing this issue would have been to amend the current statute and add the garnishment in statute, instead of putting into the Constitution. Do you have to have a constitutional amendment to do the garnishment, is that the problem?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: That is exactly correct. We have to have a Constitutional amendment, as I understand, for garnishment of wages; which I strongly agree with. I strongly agree with that. You're talking about a major, major issue, and I believe the citizens of Texas should make that decision.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Represent ative Gutierrez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Yes, I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Colleague , you and I are classmates. We came in together. I respectfully disagree on your representation of this legislation, the proposal of HJR. The idea that there is a judgment in criminal courts is just simply false. Yes, there is a judgment. That person is either placed on probation or sent to prison, you're aware of that. Are you ware of that?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I am not aware of that, because currently, right now, it says the fraudulently obtained benefits or other payment is -- And it reads, the statute, and it says that knowingly making a false statement or representation, knowing it to be false, or knowingly to (inaudible) material facts under an offense of this section is a Class A. Misdemeanor.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: You're also aware that the crime has a valuation ladder, and so the State agency puts the value of the fraud. So if the value of the fraud was committed at $10,000 or $15,000, or upwards into the hundred thousand dollars, that ladder goes up. And, therefore, it is disingenuous to let this group know that that is a Class A. misdemeanor, colleague. You understand that it could be a felony of a second degree or of a third degree or a state jail felony? representative le: I'm not arguing that statement. My statement, again, is how much money is out there fraudulently obtained, whether it's $2,000, $1,000 or $500 or whatever. And what can be reclaimed back for the hardworking --

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: I think the most important sledgehammer is our criminal courts. And the most important sledgehammer that we have in that probation is restitution. Because guess what happens when you don't pay the restitution when you're on probation? Guess what would happen.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: You tell me.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: You go to prison.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I believe I would rather see them working and paying the money back than in our prison system.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Exactly. And you will find if you study the criminal court system you will find that people that are caught for fraud or theft of this nature, at a felony level, because it is disingenuous to tell them that this is a Class A. misdemeanor, it is disingenuous to tell this body that that's what this is. This is simply wrong.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: And the statement again, the majority of the criminal prosecutions are conducted using felony statute. The majority of criminal prosecutions are conducted using the felony statutes under the Texas Penal Code. No criminal prosecutions were conducted under the misdemeanor statute in the Texas Labor Code.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: And you have answered my question succinctly.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Exactly.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: And criminal prosecutions are felonies. People are placed on probation. They pay their restitution. And I would rather have a judge collecting restitution for the State of Texas then to have the citizens of Texas spend more money on something at a time when we really don't have a whole lot of money to spend. representative leg: That's where we disagree, because NFIB supported this bill and --

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: So, in essence, your bill is bad for business.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I believe it's best for or the workers that are paying this money in, because they actually pay the money in. We send the money in on the (inaudible) salary, and they're actually paying the money in, so it is theirs. And we're just trying to make sure the money is there for them to use.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Mr. Legl er, I'm sorry, but the money is not going be there, restitution is the best tool. This is bad for business, it's bad for the taxpayers and it's soft on crime.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I disagree with you on that. Members, again, we're talking about fraudulence and we're talking about deciding Texas and making their decision.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Representa tive Hochberg raises a point of order, the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Members, is there anyone else that wants to speak on, for, or against? This brings us to the vote on passage to third reading of HJR122. Representative Oliveira has asked for strict enforcement. Members, please vote from your desk. It is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? All right, you have time. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 86 ayes, 56 nays; HJR122 is passed to third reading.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Parliame ntary inquiry, Madam Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Representa tive Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Just for information purposes. It passes to third reading but before it leaves the House it will require a hundred votes on this bill, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: It will require two thirds of those present and voting, just like any other constitutional resolution.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Is that a hundred votes, it requires a hundred votes to leave this House?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: No. A hundred -- No. It will take two thirds of those present and voting, just like any other constitutional amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. So it passes to third reading but, just for information purposes, it passes to third reading but unless it gets two thirds on the third reading it says in this House?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: It's two thirds on the third reading.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Of those present and voting?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Of those present and voting.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Very well. Madam -- Point of inquiry, Madam Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Mr. Turner , for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: On the constitutional amendment, is it a hundred or two thirds of those present and voting? Because I thought it was a hundred.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: It is a hard hundred.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. It requires a hundred. That's what I thought. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Parliamentary inquiry, Madam Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: State your inquiry, Mr. Turner.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Because Representative Oliveira asked for strict enforcement, for those that -- there may be some that don't understand what strict enforcement is, will you please explain to us what strict enforcement is?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Pursuant to the rules, members are to vote from their desks for themselves.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: This is one time -- Parliamentary inquiry, Madam Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: This is one time when your deskmate cannot vote for you, if you are not in your seat?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: That is correct. Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you. I request permission for the Committee on Transportation to meet at 3:00, while the House the in session, at 3:00 o'clock, May 3rd, at 3W15; back here to consider pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Mr. Geren, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Parliamenta ry inquiry, Madam Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Madam Speaker, under strict enforcement, if your deskmate has permission to vote for you would they be allowed to do so?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Yes, they would.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Parliame ntary inquiry, Madam Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Now, I've been here 22 years and I ain't never heard that ruling. Will somebody just -- I could be wrong. Where is it in the book?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Hold on, Mr. Turner. I will --

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Where is it in the rules?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Strict enforcement is ruled by Section 40. The clerk will read the rule.

CLERK: Section 40: Recording all votes on a voting machine. On all votes, except (inaudible) votes, members shall record their votes on the voting machine and shall not be recognized by the Chair to cast their votes on the floor. If a member attempts to vote from the floor the Speaker shall obtain a point of order directed against the member so doing. This rule shall not be applicable to the mover, or the principal opponent of the proposition being voted on, nor to a member whose voting machine is out of order. If a member demands strict enforcement of this section, Section 47 shall not apply to the taking of a vote and the House may discipline a member in violation of this rule pursuant to it's inherent authority.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The clerk will read the explanatory note to Rule 40.

CLERK: It is the practice of the Chair on closed votes, and on demands for a strict enforcement of the rules to accept only one yea and one nay vote from the floor, refusing to accept others. Actually, under the above section, he could refuse any four votes but these two, but allows violation frequently as an accommodation to members who are temporarily away from their seats.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Rule 5, Section 40, also implicates Rule 5, Section 47. The clerk will read the rule.

CLERK: Section 47: Voting for another member. Any member found guilty by the House of knowingly voting for another member on the voting machine, without that other member's permission, shall be subject to discipline deemed appropriate by the House.

REPRESENTATIVE TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Mad am Chair?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Par liamentary inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: As I understood the Chair, it was the Chair's position that under Rule 4, Section 40, if a member --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Hold on just a minute. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Mad am Chair, parliamentary inquiry. As I understood your prior ruling under Rule 5, Section 40, I thought I heard you say that if a strict enforcement is demanded that one member can still vote for their deskmate if they have permission.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: I'm a little slow hearing.

REPRESENTATIVE TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Tha t's okay. I'll restate it. I thought I heard the Chair say that Rule 5, Section 40, allows for, under a strict enforcement, a member to vote for their deskmate. And as I read Rule 5, Section 40 I understand that the rule says that if strict enforcement is demanded that Section 47 of the rule shall not apply, which is the rule that allows you to vote for another member.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: We're looking at the historical precedence, and we'll get back with you, if that's all right.

REPRESENTATIVE TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: And that would be before we have another vote, I hope?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: We certainly hope so.

REPRESENTATIVE TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Tha nk you.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Thank you. The Chair lays out on second reading HJR130. Before we do that, members, the following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Transportation will meet at 3:00 p.m. on May 3rd, 2011, at 3W.15. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Chair lays out on second reading HJR130. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HJR130 by Branch. Meeting requirements of the United States Department of Education concerning federal student aid by naming private institutions of higher education in the State of Texas that are authorized to operate educational programs beyond secondary education, including programs leading to a degree or certificate.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Chair recognizes Representative Branch to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, HJR130 is intended to ensure that students in our private colleges and universities continue to be eligible to receive federal financial aid. I want to make it clear that this JR does not propose a constitutional amendment, rather we are attempting to make a statement to the U.S. Department of Education. And these new regulations by the Department of Education require institutions to be established by name, as an educational institution by a state, through a charter statute of constitutional provision, or other quote "state action". Public institutions have no difficulty meeting these requirements, but private or independent institutions are no longer established by this sort of state action under our jurisprudence. Passing HJR130 is the most efficient way to validate the status of Texas independent institutions for the U.S. Department of Education. HJR130 informs the Department of Education that these institutions are authorized to provide postsecondary education and grant degrees and certificates. It lists them by name and shows the way they meet the October 2010 regulations. Once the Congress of the Republic of Texas, the Texas Legislature the now the Texas Secretary of State all granted charters to private or independent colleges or universities, those methods of establishing private or independent institutions are no longer used in state law. Now it authorizes these institutions by defining their accreditation status under Section 31.00315 of the Education Code. This section, however, does not however establish institutions by name, as the new U.S. Department of Education -- excuse me -- regulations require. So as a joint resolution requiring two thirds majority vote of each House, HJR130 should be an adequate demonstration of Texas' state action with respect to these institution to allow our students to get financial aid.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: For what purpose?

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Would the gentleman yield for a couple questions?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: Do you yield, Representative Branch?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: I will yield for some questions.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLEY: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE BYRON COOK: Mr. Branch, do you understand correctly that we are passing this joint resolution in response to regulations passed by the U.S. Department of Education?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Yes, Mr. Cook, we are.

REPRESENTATIVE BYRON COOK: And can you explain to me what the U.S. Department of Education did that requires this action?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Yes. The Department of Education, as I have mentioned, adopted detailed regulations to quote, "clarify the role of the states in ensuring he integrity of student aid programs." The regulations require an institution to be established by name as an educational institution by a state, and is authorized to operate educational programs beyond secondary education, including programs leading to a degree or a certificate. That's the stated language of the regulation. All public institutions are created by name in our statute, but a few private institutions are named in law.

REPRESENTATIVE BYRON COOK: Mr. Branch, historically we have authorized these institutions to operate and grant degrees. Can you tell me more clearly what the problem is?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: We do have a process for new institutions to obtain a certificate of authority to grant a degree from the Texas Higher Education -- from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Those certificates have their names on them. The problem is that the institutions' names in this resolution have operated for many years and have been regionally accredited for as long as the accrediting agencies have existed. Because of the accreditation they are exempt from the coordinating boards' certification process. So we must take this action to make the DOE recognize these institutions are authorized under Texas law and beyond that, in this session in the legislature, has acted had named them as authorized through this resolution.

REPRESENTATIVE BYRON COOK: Why did you chose to use a HJR for this purpose when that is usually reserved for an amendment to the Texas Constitution, or to ratify an amendment to the U.S. Constitution?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: A fair question. As mentioned, we decided to using a joint resolution, because it required a two third majority vote to both the House and the Senate, to pass a joint resolution. And we believe that that should be a sufficient demonstration of state action. We're not exactly sure what that means, but this is our best attempt to comply with the federal regulations.

REPRESENTATIVE BYRON COOK: All right. Thank you, Mr. Branch. Mrs. Speaker, I move that the discussion between myself and Mr. Branch be reduced to writing and placed in the journal.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, before we move on Representative Martinez Fischer raised a parliamentary inquiry regarding Rule 5, Section 40. Rule 5, Section 40, was amended in 2009 to add a section that if a member demanded strict enforcement, Section 47 shall not apply to the taking of a vote and the House may discipline a member in violation of this rule, pursuant to its inherent authority. So when strict enforcement is requested, the Chair will note that strict enforcement has been requested and request that members take their seats, and request that members vote only for themselves. Mr. Martinez Fischer, the parliamentarian apologizes for any confusion this has caused the members. Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against HJR130? Chair recognizes Representative Branch to close.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, obviously, because we're trying to let the federal government know that we took state action that the private universities that are chartered in the state, in order for these students to get federal financial aid we need to have a record vote. So I move passage, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Member, the question occurs on passage of HJR130. It's record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Representative Murphy voting aye. Representative Branch voting aye. Showing Representative Lucio voting aye. Have all voted being 145 ayes and 0 nays, HJR130 is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Sp eaker, members, I move to suspend all necessary rules to allow the Local and Consent Calendar Committee to set a local and consent calendar for Thursday, May the 5th, 2011, at 10:00 a.m.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Sp eaker members, I request permission for the Committee on Local and Consent Calendar to meet while the House is in session at 3:00 p.m. today, May 3rd, 2011, at 3W9, to consider a Local and Consent Resolution Calendar.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following announcement. Clerk will read the announcements.

CLERK: The Committee on Local and Consent Calendars will meet at 3:15 p.m. today, May 3rd, 2011, at 3W.9. This will be a formal meeting to consider a Local, Consent and Resolutions Calendar.

SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: The Chair recognizes Mrs. Thompson for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Sp eaker, members, I'd like to make this motion again, please. I request permission for the Committee on Local Consent Calendar to meet while the House is in session at 3:15 p.m. today, May 3rd, 2011, in 3W9, to consider a Local, Consent and Resolution Calendar.

REPRESENTATIVE BRYAN HUGHES: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The motion is granted. Following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Local and Consent Calendars will meet at 3:15 p.m. today, May 3rd, 2011, at 3W.9. This will be a formal meeting to consider a Local and Consent Calendar.

REPRESENTATIVE BRYAN HUGHES: Chair recognizes Mr. Raymond for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I request permission for the Committee on Human Services to meet while the House is in session today, 4:00 p.m. May the 3rd, 2011, at 3W.9 to consider pending business.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? So ordered. The following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Human Services to meet at 4:00 p.m. on May 3rd, 2011, at 3W.9. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business.

JOE STRAUS: Excuse the members of the Transportation Committee, except for Representative Darby, because of a meeting of the committee; on the motion of Representative Brown. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Taylor for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request permission for the Committee on Elections to meet while the House is in session at 3:05 today, in 1W.41 at the Agriculture Museum. 2114, okay, to consider House Bill 1696 and House Bill 2051.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

CLERK: The Committee on Elections will meet at 3:05 on May 3rd, 2011, at 1W.14 in the Agriculture Museum. This will be a formal meeting to consider HB1696 and HB2051.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative King for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE SUSAN KING: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members, I would like to recognize a group in the gallery. Please stand up, in blue shirts. Future Sweetwater. We're not only known for rattlesnakes, we're known for young students in high school who are going to come learn about this office. I certainly know they're happy to be here today from Sweetwater, Texas, Future Sweetwater High School students learning about government advocacy and doing the right thing. Please welcome these students from Sweetwater, Texas. Thank you. Also, in case you haven't seen them around the Capitol, today is First Tuesday, the last one for the session. These are the physicians, and they come to advocate for medicine and taking care of patients, so please, if you're trying to get away from one of these white-coated professionals, don't do that, and listen to what they have to say. Welcome to all the doctors, First Tuesday at the Capitol. Thank you very much.

JOE STRAUS: Chair lays out as matter of postponed business House Bill 8. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB8 by Darby. Relating to prohibiting certain private transfer fees and the preservation of private real property rights; providing penalties.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Taylor raises a point of order on further consideration of House Bill 8, pursuant to Rule 4, section 32C. Chair recognizes Mr. Taylor and Mr. Darby. Chair thanks both gentleman for bringing their point or order to the Chair, for being raised, and notice the decision on this point of order is very close. Chair has reviewed the bill and the bill analysis and is of the impression that the bill analysis does not violate Rule 4, Section 32C. And the point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Representative Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Thank you, members.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: For what purpose?

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Darby, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thank you, Mr. Darby. I appreciate you spending a little time with me, just kind of going over some things that you and I have discussed significantly, in this bill. And I'm proud to be a coauthor on this bill with you, I think it's good work. Specifically, what I want to do is draw our attention to Section 5.202, it's on page two, where it relates to certain private transfer fees obligation void. And under Subsection B, under 9, situations or circumstances that are not considered private transfer fees.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: And number 8, that would be one that would apply to a situation where a neighborhood has a golf club in the neighborhood, and for which transfer fees or dues are an obligation to a homeowner, if they are going to live in that neighborhood; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Okay. And so that's considered not a transfer fee under this subsection?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: At one time I discussed doing an amendment with you where number eight, specifically related to the golf club, would be deleted. What would be the consequence of deleting that exemption?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Of course, this bill is simply prospective in nature only. So any subdivision that had a transfer fee associated with it for the support of a golf club would still continue in existence after the bill takes effect. Then, if that private property transfer fee did not follow into an exception, then it would be a violation of this act.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: And it would be an unenforceable transfer fee in that --

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: So if I live in a neighborhood that's built out, that's pretty mature, most of the building is completed; it's clearly defined as a tract of land, and after the enactment of this bill goes forward, if I did exempt that, if you did chose to exempt that group, there still would be a requirement of a transfer fee to be played out in that circumstance?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Exactly.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: So only if the person went out and built a new tract of land, would this be unenforceable?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: That's correct? Okay. Now the next question would be is that you have a number of reporting requirements and transparency issues in here, which I wholly support. If number 8 was exempted, would the people that had that transfer fee in place, in other words the grandfather transfer fee, would they still be obligated to do the reporting as defined in this bill?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: They would be.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Okay. So regardless of whether there was an amendment to exemption number 8, versus not being in there, there's going to continue to be that requirement that they report publicly and comply with the provisions of this law?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Exactly. Exactly.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Okay. Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Zerwas, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: I would like to move that the comments between myself and Chairman Darby be reduced to writing and placed in the journal.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Mr. Speaker, I move adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Taylor of Collin.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Taylor.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, members, House Bill 8 is government run amok. It takes away billions of dollars of property rights that Texans currently have, that you and have as homeowners currently have, and it takes them away with no compensation whatsoever. I think at the heart of this bill, I think there is the idea that many consumers don't understand what they're doing. So I've offered up an amendment that simply says that if a person enters into this contract, and they've gotten some kind of advise from an attorney, or they've been counseled by a real estate broker then, in turn, they should have enough knowledge at that point to understand this transaction to then, in turn, be able to make the decision that they actually want to sell the property with the transfer fee. I think this really goes to the heart of the problem that Representative Darby is trying to solve, which is do people really understand what they're doing? And I think this really gives people the chance to know what they're doing, to get some advice and then, in turn, to do what they think is right with their property, rather than having us, as the Texas House of Representatives, take away those property rights. Let the Texans keep those property rights, and if they get the proper notice they, in turn, can decide whether or not they want to give their property rights up or not.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mrs. Riddle, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: I was prepared to close, but I'm happy to yield.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Okay. You said that a lot of folks are not real familiar with what this means, and I think you're probably right. Can you tell us what -- I was told it has freehold transfer language in here. Can you explain what that means?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Are you talking about my amendment, Representative Riddle?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Well, with what we're trying to apparently avoid in here.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: House Bill -- Okay. For generations, Texans had the right to sell their property and attach a transfer fee on it, just in the same way that Texas today have the right to sell their appropriate and retain mineral interests, retain easements, retain any kind of -- they could sell timber rights, keep timber rights, sell water rights, keep water rights. Property is property. You own it. It is yours. It is guaranteed by the Constitution. It is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, et cetera. What House Bill 8 -- Four years ago, the Legislature made a decision to vastly reduce the ability for Texans to have transfer rights, and gave two basic exceptions. This bill, House Bill 8, seeks to effectively eliminate the use of transfer fees for property owners in Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Okay. Essentially, if -- Let's say Mrs. Smith sold her house, she was a developer and she sold a home that she built, and she included a transfer fee in that, then that forever fee could continue until she's 99 years old; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: That is the way it exists under current law today.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: That is the way it exists in current law today?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: And is this changing that?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Actually, you know what, I misspoke. The individual that owns the property has to either enter a homeowners association, or they would have to assign it to a 501C3 nonprofit organization.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Under current law, today. So the ability to have a transfer fee has been greatly redistricted already, four years ago, by Representative Darby in this Legislature.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Okay. And so, one more time, just explain to me real quick what your amendment --

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: My amendment allows Texans to keep their property rights, assuming that they've gotten advise from either a real estate agent or an attorney. The idea being -- I think one of the real issues that Representative Darby has with this transaction is the problem with notice, is that people don't really understand this property right, they don't really understand what they're doing. So my thought is let's get some real estate professionals in there that really understand how this thing works, explain it to the consumer and then the property owner themselves can make the decision on whether or not they want to actually get rid of this right that, unfortunately, this Legislature just seems to be galloping towards taking away without any sort of compensation at all.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, when Representative Darby comes back to microphone I would like to ask a question.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Mr. Speaker , would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Darby, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Certainly.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Hey there.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: How are you?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Fine. I was reviewing this the other night and I'm going to have to admit, it's a little bit confusing to me. I looked at those who testified for and against, and there seems to be quite a bit of folks who testified against it, including Pam Bailey from Chaparral Management, and other community association management corporations like that. And there seems to be a concern with that. Can you sort of address the concerns?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: I certainly can. I'm glad you brought that up, Representative Riddle. When this bill was laid out it's a whole lot different than it is today. We have met the concerns of the HOA. Quite frankly, after visiting with a lot of people that appeared and submitted testimony when the bill was laid out, they were confused. A lot of them thought my bill didn't go far enough, they wanted to do away with HOAs entirely. So they were against my bill, because it didn't go far enough to do away with HOAs. When I explained to them this has nothing to do with the HOAs themselves, it's just the private transfer fees that's being administered by the HOAs, we resolved a lot of that concern, also.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: So that sort of eliminates that transfer fee that can go on for 99 years?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: And there were concerns about HOAs. You've got to understand that HOAs normally charge a processing fee or a transactional fee, if you will, to change on the books and the records of the HOA the former seller and owner with the new owner. And so they needed a perfunctory processing fee to charge in connection with that transfer. They have historically called that fee a transfer fee, so when my bill says a prohibition against transfer fees, then they were naturally alarmed that little $100, $200 fee to change on their records was being impacted negatively.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: We assured them that that was not the purpose of the bill, and we added language that clarifies that. So I think we've removed most of the objections that the HOAs have.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Okay. Thank you very much Representative Darby. I appreciate your adding a great deal of clarity to this. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Thank you. Members, with regard to the amendment that --

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: For what purpose?

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Does the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB ORR: Representative Darby, when you're talking about -- I've heard a lot about property rights here just a few minutes ago, and a lot of times these fees are set up when the developer first puts in the development, and the homeowner doesn't really have any choice if they get Realtor advice. We're both in the development and the real estate business. They don't have the choice as if to accept it or not. If something is to be going on for every transaction from here on out, is that true?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: That's correct. That's what we're trying to prevent, that original developer being able to profit over the next 99 years on every sale of houses within that subdivision, while adding no real value to the transaction.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB ORR: Absolutely. So when the lots are sold in the development, do you think the developer actually reduces a value in tremendous amount, because now they're going to be getting this fee for the next 99 years?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Well, that's a argument that's been used, but we have yet to have any proof of that. What you're relying upon is the developer saying that because we have a transfer fee I'm going naturally sell you that lot less than fair market value, taking into account that this property has been burdened by this private transfer fee for the next 99 years. So I'm going to sell you that lot for a lot cheaper, which is contrary to the common sense. And so it just never happens.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB ORR: So really what's going to happen, if this amendment -- if the homeowner, for the next 99 years of their property value, they're going to have to pay basically a tax of a transfer fee every time the property is sold, therefore reducing property rights, not increasing it. Would that be correct?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: That's correct. That is a toll fee. They are having to pay a toll, if you will, every time their house is sold for the next 99 years.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB ORR: That's crazy. I think you've got a good bill and I think this amendment should be voted down.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Geren, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Would Mr. Darby yield for some questions?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Absolutely.

JOE STRAUS: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Darby, are you aware that the FHA is considering rules currently that would make this amendment illegal?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: That's correct. I mean the current rules being promulgated by the FHFA, the Federal Housing Financial Authority, would prohibit this amendment from having any force and effect.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: And the other thing that is pointed out there, obviously you have taken care of a lot of the HOA problems, but most of the other people were against it and that are currently still against your bill, they are the ones making this one percent; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: That is exactly right.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: You've got a real good bill and I urge you to fight the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Thank you. Well, members, listen up. I'm going ask that you table this amendment, and this is really not about disclosure, although my bill creates new disclose requirements and new information that must be provided to the parties in a real estate transaction. This amendment goes beyond that issue. This goes to the basic premise as to the existence of a private transfer fee. This is a fee associated personally with that developer. It adds nothing of value to the property. It contributes to further alienation of real property, and it leads to real estate being devalued over a period of time. And that is why this amendment -- It's not about disclosure, it's about the pure existence of a private transfer fee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Mr. Speaker ? Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Menendez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Darby, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: I do.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Quite simply, Representative Darby, does this amendment gut the intent of your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: With that, members, I move to table this amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone else wishing to speak on, for, or against the Taylor amendment? Chair recognizes Representative Taylor to close.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, members, I take guidance for what we do here in this chamber from the Declaration of Independence. We hold these true to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. We are here to secure the rights of the people who we represent. House Bill 8 takes rights away. Billions of dollars of property rights that Texans have today will be taken away with the passing of House Bill 8. This amendment merely seeks to say one basic idea, if a person understands if they have a chance to talk to an attorney, to talk to a real estate agent, sit down an get notice then, in turn, they should be able to keep that property right that they currently have today. I'm standing up for liberty, I'm standing up for property rights. I've been very disturbed by a lot of the mis-information I have heard in support of House Bill 8. This amendment is not illegal under FHA rules. I don't know how anybody can say, any reasonable person in the real estate industry can possibly construe that. That's a long discussion I will have with my colleagues from Fort Worth. But, Mr. Speaker, members, I move that you please vote against tabling this. Let Texans have their property rights. Why take it away? They've had them for generations. Let's not take them away now. Vote no.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Taylor sends up an amendment. Representative Darby moves to table. This is on the motion to table. Clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Darby voting aye. Representative Taylor voting no. Representative Geren voting aye. Have all voted? Showing Representative Geren voting aye. Have all voted? There being 121 ayes, 15 nays; the motion to table prevails. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Taylor of Collins.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Taylor.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: I pull my amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Representative Riddle, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: A question. Would you, please, have the comments between Representative Darby and I reduced to writing and put in the record?

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Thank you.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 8? Question occurs on passage -- Chair recognizes Representative Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Members, I know it's been a long afternoon and we got a lot to go, so I'm just going to move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 8. All those in favor say aye, those opposed nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 8 is passed to engrossment. Excuse Representative Rodney Anderson of Dallas because of important business in the district, on the motion of Representative Sheets. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business on second reading House Bill 1435. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1435 by Elkins. Relating to the participation by a taxing unit in a suit to compel an appraisal review board to order a change in an appraisal roll.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Taylor.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY TAYLOR: I move to postpone House Bill 1435 until 9:00 a.m. tomorrow. I'm sorry, 9:00 a.m. Friday. I move to postpone it until 9:00 a.m. Friday.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3790. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3790 by Pitts. Relating to certain state fiscal matters; providing penalties.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Pitts.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to postpone House Bill 3790 until 8:00 a.m. May the 3rd, 2011.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion --

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: May the 4th.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 2494. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2494 by Legler. Relating to recovery of fraudulently obtained unemployment benefits.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Legler.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Mr. Speaker, members, I am also going to do this high noon, my bill, on the garnishment of wages and enabling bill, to postpone that to high noon, July 4th, 2011.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: Does Mr. Legler's motion continue to apply on July 4th if we're in session on that day?

JOE STRAUS: Thank you, Mr. Strama. I don't believe so. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3640. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3640 by Pitts. Relating to the remittance and allocation of certain taxes and fees.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Pitts.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: I move to postpone House Bill 3640 until May the 4th at 8:00 a.m.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Spea ker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Parliame ntary inquiry. I'm going to assume, though, that the cut off on the amendment still applies --

JOE STRAUS: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: -- from the previous time. We're not reopening the amendment period on either of the the vote bills?

JOE STRAUS: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: All right.

JOE STRAUS: The Chair lays out on second reading HJR98. The clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HJR98 by Burkett.. Proposing a constitutional amendment denying bail to certain persons charged with a violent or sexual offense after having been previously convicted of a violent or sexual offense.

JOE STRAUS: The Chair recognizes Representative Burkett.

REPRESENTATIVE CINDY BURKETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, HJR98 requires bond denial for certain individuals accused of committing violent or sexual crimes. Currently, under the Texas Constitution and current statute, a judge or magistrate has the discretion to deny bail to a defendant accused of certain violent or sexual crimes, if such a crime is alleged to have occurred while the defendant is under the supervision of the state for having been convicted of a separate felony. The violent and sexual crime is defined to include murder, aggravated assault, aggravated kidnapping, aggravated robbery, aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, and indecency with a child. HJR98 retains is categories of violent and sexual crimes that already exist in section 11A of the Constitution, and then it then provide that when a person has previously been convicted of one of these crimes, is charged with a second offense that falls within either category, the judge or magistrate shall deny bail to the second offense. This issue was brought to any attention by a constituent whose son was murdered, allegedly, by a man previously convicted of sexual assault with a child and who had history of not registering as a sex offender. There were several witnesses to the gruesome murder. However, when the police went to arrest the alleged offender, they found that he was a fugitive from justice. When the defendant was finally arrested, a city judge set his bail at one million dollars. Unfortunately, when the defendant was transferred to Dallas County, a magistrate reduced the bail to $100,000 A reporter discovered the change and alerted the mother of the victim --

JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment -- Chair recognizes Representative Burkett.

REPRESENTATIVE CINDY BURKETT: Sorry, y'all. Okay. Anyway. Thank you. A reporter discovered the change and alerted the mother of the victim who, along with the prosecutor assigned to the case, secured a bond increase. Texas law should not put the burden of proper bond policy on the shoders of a quick thinking reporter, or a bereaved mother. Mr. Speaker, I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Members, anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against HJR98? Question occurs on adoption of HJR98. It's a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? Showing Representative Phillips voting aye. Showing Representative Flynn voting aye. Have all voted? Have all members voted? There being 139 ayes and 1 nay, HJR98 is adopted. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 238. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB238 by Phillips. Relating to the issuance of "Choose Life" license plates and the creation of the "Choose Life" account in the general revenue fund.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speake r?

JOE STRAUS: Mrs. Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I wish to raise a point of order under Rule 4, Section 32C.

JOE STRAUS: Bring your point of order down front. Representative Farrar raises a point of order. Pursuant to Rule 4, Section 32, that the bill analysis is substantially materially misleading. The Chair has reviewed the bill and the bill analysis and finds that it meets the requirements of the rule. The point of order is respectfully overruled. Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 238 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 257. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB257 by Carona. Relating to the issuance of "Choose Life" license plates and the creation of the "Choose Life" account in the general revenue fund.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I appreciate the opportunity to bring this bill, and I appreciate the 90 plus of you that have signed on as coauthors. Again, this bill very simply, as we've had in the past and hopefully, this will be -- And with this being Senate Bill, we can pass this and send this to the governor today or tomorrow, when we pass on the second reading. It simply sets up and allows us to have a Choose Life license plate. I told my wife that we were going to be doing this this week. I thought we might do it yesterday, but we didn't get do it. And she says, you know, I saw one from Oklahoma yesterday. She was in the shopping mall or parking lot. You know, our community is the Red River, so a lot of folks from Oklahoma come down and shop and Oklahoma has choose life license plates, and so do 24 other states. And I think it's time for us to go ahead and get this legislation passed. You know, we created a statute, I think my first session here, to try to make -- to streamline the sects to try to establish these specialty license plates. But we maintain in the law that on certain things that the department felt like could be controversial then we're going to leave that to the Legislature to do. And I think that's good that we did that. And so I brought this bill for a specific purpose, and to have the choose life license plate. We had this and passed it last session on a couple of different bills. We went through debate and it was on the Sunset Bill, and as y'all know, the Sunset Bill didn't pass last session. With that, I would be glad to answer a few questions and ask you to support this legislation.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speake r?

JOE STRAUS: Mrs. Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yes, I will.

JOE STRAUS: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Phillip s, you're aware, I'm sure, of the 2004 -- I'm sorry the 4th Circuit case, Planned Parenthood South Carolina verses Rhodes?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Tell me about that.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Well, in that case the South Carolina choose life license plates were ruled unconstitutional in that they discriminated against the viewpoints of those that oppose this anti-choice message.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And, you know, that would be an issue if you didn't have a right to bring your anti-choice legislation and to present a plate, or present that viewpoint. We're not limiting anybody's viewpoint. We're just allowing those folks to say -- have choose life. And, again, make sure we're clear, this choose life license plate and the proceeds from this is going to go benefit adoptions. And those mothers that have found a tough time in their life, and they're going put that child up for adoption, it helps through that process and helps those that help those young ladies through. I think I have shared before the opportunity that my wife and I had to have a young lady live with us who made the choice of life, but her family said, you know, during this pregnancy they really didn't want her to stay there. She came and lived with us and lived with our family, and my wife got to be the birth coach and got to see the amazing opportunity of that baby being born, and that new adoptive family coming and taking that child home, and that child having an opportunity in life. And that's the type of thing this will help. It this help those young ladies who find themselves in a situation where they are choosing adoption. And this will provide for them. So I'm not worried about Planned Parenthood, if they want to file a lawsuit they may do that. I believe that we have a good Attorney General who will stand up for our Texas rights and deal with that appropriately.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: You mentioned earlier that this body -- that there's an opportunity for this body to express opposite viewpoints, so I believe there's an amendment that's been filed that does express that opposite viewpoint. Are you willing to accept that amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: No. Because this is the Senate version, because I want to get this bill passed, I'm not going to accept any amendments, so it doesn't have to go back over there. I think that this is specifically we worked through. I've got bill authors that have signed off on this. And I know some of the bill authors may be okay with some of the amendments, but I have coauthors and I'm committed to get this bill through -- and -- and -- as is.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: What are the -- What do you believe is the likelihood of such of the opposite viewpoints of a bill like that passing this body?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: You know, I don't know until we see that, it depends on what it says and it depends on what people are going on. But that's not this bill, this bill is very specific to choose life license plate and, you know, I've got a picture here of --

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: So you believe such a bill could pass this body?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Well, that's not this bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I don't know -- I want to know about your bill. I just want to know what you believe if this body could pass such a thing, or are you just not going to answer this question?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't know where it will pass. No one has brought this --

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: It's okay if you don't want to answer it.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: It's my understanding there are those that probably wouldn't want to bring it, because even if it passed it probably wouldn't sell enough to make the license plate, but I don't know that.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Does this bill contain --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: This is kind of what the license plate would look like, something like that. Pretty standard across the United States.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Does this bill contain any provision that would express the views of Texans like myself who are pro choice?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: You can vote against this. This is choose life, it doesn't say chose anything else, it doesn't say pro-life it just says choose life and it goes towards adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I understand that.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't think that it discriminates.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: You've said that several times. But I'm just asking is there any possibility in your bill for another viewpoint to be expressed?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't know what viewpoint you want to express, other than we're going to choose life and we're going to support adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: So it's limited to one viewpoint, then?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: That's the bill that I brought. And, again, you're more than welcome to --

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: That's fair. I just wanted an answer. Where does the money from these licenses plates that's collected -- where does it go?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Well, it says, as you know, as you discussed awhile ago, the Attorney General will be involved in setting up a panel and developing rules under this section. And, specifically, just so we read exactly what it says --

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Can you also answer the questions as to whether any pro-choice organizations are eligible to receive these funds?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Okay. Let's kind of talk about this. Okay. What this says is that it may be sent only to provide material needs to the pregnant women who are considering placing the children for adoption; including the provision of clothing, housing, prenatal care, food, utilities and transportation to provide for the needs of infants who are awaiting placement with adoptive parents, to provide training an advertising as an aid to adoption, and to provide pregnancy tests and pre-adoption and post-adoption counseling. Those are the things that it will be used for.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: So it's limited only to only women who have made the decision to not have an adoption, correct? It doesn't spend any money say for counseling for women that are maybe in between, or it's only for women who have decided not have an abortion, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: No, I don't think that's correct. It says pre-adoption counseling.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: So that means you've made the decision to not have an abortion?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't think so. That's not what it says. It says pre-adoption counseling.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Okay. Let me ask you this: To your knowledge, do you know of any other specialty license places that the State of Texas has for which a pro-choice organization would qualify for funding?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Which would what?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: For which a pro-choice organization would qualify for funding? Do you know of any other specialty license plates?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: We've got so many specialty license plate programs, I don't know all of them. So I couldn't answer that.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Are you saying you don't know or are you saying --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I'm just saying --

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: You're the Chairman of Transportation. You don't know?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And we've so many specialty license plates I don't know what all of them do. I know I was at one time involved in doing a Smile Texas Style, and so if you had a pro-choice organization related to that, I don't know. I don't know what the restrictions are. But this doesn't say pro-choice anywhere in here.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: But you're also a huge advocate for your position, and so I would imagine that you would know if somebody on the opposite end was receiving any monies. Do you believe that these plates purport to speak for all Texans, or just those Texans with the message that you're promoting?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I believe that anybody that wants to get this license plate and pay for it, that they're entitled to do that under this bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. And this is a political message, unlike some of the others. And so I'm just wondering, is there any opportunities for someone with a different viewpoint on this political issue to express that opinion?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I disagree that this is a political statement. Choose life.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speake r? Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Representative Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I ask that our exchange be reduced to writing and be placed in the record, please.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Mr. Speake r, would the gentleman yield for a few questions?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Certainly.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: All right. Representative Phillips, just to get the mechanics straight. So people would buy the license plate and part of that money would go to a fund, which would be administered by the Attorney General, with the advice and counsel of a advisory committee on funding certain organizations that either counsel -- provide counseling and material assistance to pregnant women who are considering placing their children for adoption, and who do not charge for their services, and that are not related to any kind of abortion related services; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I believe that's right. I think you read that correctly.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Okay. Do you have an example -- Can you give us an example of an organization or two that might qualify under your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't have any specific ones in mind. I think until they set the rules and go through that we're not going know exactly. But I know that there's some nonprofit adoption groups that are helping young ladies find the opportunity, and families in this situation. I think -- I think probably they would come towards that.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: So I guess that you -- Representative Farrar's question, a group that was philosophically pro-choice could receive money if they met the qualifications about providing counseling to people that are thinking about adopting, as long as they are not providing abortion related services?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And it's even beyond that; they can't refer to those who do as well.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: What do you mean by that?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Well, that's what the language says.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Well, what do you mean by that language? What's the legal effect of that language in this statute

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I think that's what it says.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: So they can't mention the word Planned Parenthood, or they can't know that Planned Parenthood exists? So what's the standard of the threshold?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: It does not contract to an organization that provides abortions or abortion related services, or makes referrals to abortion providers.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: So, practically speaking, you're probably intending them to not have brochures up that sends them over to a facility that performs abortion, or give them information about a facility that performs abortion; is that your intent?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Can you say that again?

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: So, practically speaking, I would imagine that your intention is that whatever center these women -- whatever center is receiving funding, they don't either verbally refer these women to any place that might perform an abortion, or at their site give out a brochure of other information about providers of abortion services?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: That is correct. I think that's exactly correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: I'm concerned that on the first page, under Section 402.026, the last few lines of that section, under A2 -- well, actually A1, it talks about money being deposited to the creditors -- to the account under this bill. And then also that this account can be refinanced with gifts, grants, donations and legislative appropriations. So I have a few questions regarding that. Are you setting up a line item here that can be funded later by an Appropriations Committee if a future Legislature, in addition to just this?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I think that would allow for that to happen, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: So that is your intent?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Okay. It gives grants and donations. So are we not only dealing any kind of state appropriations or funds that would be generated from the sale of license plates, but also the State -- the Attorney General's Office may be operating what would amount to a kind of nonprofit organization or fund, which would be giving out money to other nonprofits?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Typically on these license plates, to get them going you have to put a certain amount of money, and so you can't sell plates until the plate is in existence. And, specifically, that's where the donation and grants will come, to put money in there to get the plates started. That's fairly common in the --

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: But you would agree, Representative, that it also leaves open the possibly that the Attorney General or the Advisory Committee members could continue to solicit basically with the state acting as an agent, to solicit donations to this fund?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: If people want to give money to help those folks in this adoption situation, I think that would be a good thing.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: But you agree that it could create that situation?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't know.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Chisum calls a point of order, that this gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is respectfully sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Mr. Speake r?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Castro, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: I would request that the exchange between Chairman Phillips and I be reduced to writing and placed in the journal.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Members, you heard the motion. Is there any objection? So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Is there anyone wishing to speak against -- The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: The Chair recognizes Representative Farrar. The Chair recognizes Mr. Zedler for an introduction.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL ZEDLER: Mr. Speaker, members, I would like to recognize some people with the Texas Home School Coalition down here celebrating Capitol Day. We have the Howard family, the Gilroy family, the Daughtry* family, and the Johnston family. Welcome to the Texas House of Representatives. Glad you're here and enjoy yourselves.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speake r, members, I don't think Mr. Phillips and I really have a different opinion in terms of what the goal is. And so this amendment actually addresses that goal, which is adoptions. So, instead of the license place reading choose life, which that could mean anything to anybody, it's a political message. But the people here in this room know what that means, because we go through campaigns and we deal with this. So my amendment actually deals with more of a policy issue, and that is choose adoption. I mean, who couldn't be for that? I think that's terrific, where we can help people to adopt. That's great. But I don't think that we should coerce them, or anything like that. I think it has to be a an individual choice. You want to make sure the parent is ready to be a parent, and so on. And children don't fall into other sorts of situations where parents who are not prepared for that. But I think it's a positive message. It's a policy message. And, again, I think there's no way that you could confuse what this means verses what this political message of choose life means. Thank you. I ask you to vote against the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against the Farrar amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, I respectfully move to table --

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The Chair now recognizes you.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, I apologize. I would respectfully move to table. I want to keep this bill the way it is, and not have to have it go back to the Senate. There's always opportunity, of course, for people to bring this alternative plate if they choose to. I move to table. Please vote aye.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Chair recognizes Representative Farrar to close.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mrs. Speak er, members, I think this is an important issue and I don't think -- I think the process is important. There is an opportunity always to better bills, otherwise Mr. Phillips wouldn't be amending any other Senate Bills that are coming forward, and none of us would be amending any other Senate Bills that come forward. This is our opportunity, this process is our opportunity to make bills better. I think this amendment does make this bill better and I ask you to vote no on the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Representativ e Farrar sends up an amendment. Representative Phillips moves to table the amendment. The question occurs on the motion to table. Members, vote aye or vote no. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Showing -- The Chair recognizes Representative Solomons voting aye. Representative Villarreal voting no. Representative Farrar voting no. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 98 ayes and 40 nays, the motion to table prevails. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Chair recognizes Representative Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speake r and members, this amendment redistributes the fees generated from these choose life license plates to support early childhood intervention programs. This program is administered by the Department of Assisted and Rehabilitative Services, better known as DARS. Early childhood intervention is a state-wide system of services for families of babies and toddlers with disabilities or delays in development. In fact, during our budget debate, we made some sweeping cuts to services provided to children and the disabled. This program helps both of these populations, and we should work to support it. In fact, Representative Perry provided an amendment during the budget debate that moved funds from family planning programs to this early childhood intervention program, to help protect the vulnerable population. This amendment aims to do the same thing. Let's take this opportunity to give more funds to a program that members of this legislature have showed support for earlier in this session. Let's show our constituents that the children and disabled of Texas are our priority.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Representativ e Phillips to speak in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you. I would respectfully move to table. I think that we worked really hard to craft the language of where the funds are going to go. Voting to table is in no way a statement on those that the value the early childhood intervention. This is not a statement of that. What this bill is focused on, the choose life license plate, and we know that we believe it will be successful if we have it directed the way we would. So, again, I would respectfully move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I don't really have much more to add, except that, you know, this is our opportunity to restore some of those cuts that is we made earlier this session to these two very vulnerable populations. I ask you to vote no on the motion to table and I ask you, Mr. Speaker, for strict enforcement, please.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Representativ e Farrar sends up an amendment. Representative Phillips moves to table. The question occurs on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote no. The clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Farrar voting no. Representative Phillips voting aye. Representative Castro voting no. Representative Villarreal voting no. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 92 ayes and 42 nays, the motion to table prevails. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Villarreal.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The Chair recognizes Representative Villarreal.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ms. Speaker, members, this amendment specifies that the fees generated from the choose life license plate can only be used to support maternity homes. With the current financial crisis that this state government and Texans are facing we owe it to Texas and taxpayers to make sure that the tax dollars that we are collecting are allocated to facilities that are not unlicensed, unregulated, where there's no accountability in providing meaningful social services. Maternity homes are licensed by the Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services, and serve pregnant women with a broad range of services, regardless of whether or not an adoption is planned. Maternity homes can provide long-term care, which includes housing, medical care, life skills, counseling and job assistance. Truthfully, these maternity homes are a platform to lift up young moms who've had an unplanned, unexpected pregnancy, get them back on their feet and prepare them to be self-sustaining for themselves and their children. These services are provided free to the young women, young women are provided assistance and support, whether they choose adoption or parenting. Mr. Speaker, I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips to speak against the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you very much. I appreciate Representative Villarreal bringing that amendment. And I believe that if those homes meet the qualification in here, that they can certainly apply. And I think that's something that Representative Villarreal needs to work with the Attorney General on and say they need to meet that definition if they do. Maternity homes do a great job, but we're not just talking about maternity homes here, and we're talking about beyond that. And again, voting no or voting yes on the motion to table that I'm going move to table is not -- is not a vote against maternity homes.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Mrs. Spea ker?

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Mr. Villarreal , for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Will the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yeah. Let me finish the question then I would be glad to. It's not a vote against maternity homes. It's a vote -- Let's keep this bill the way that we've brought it, and once we finish the vote it can go directly to the governor and be signed and be finally passed into law. And, again, I certainly think that maternity homes do a great service, and depending on how it's set up they certainly would be folks that could apply, depending on their structure. And it specifies that in the bill there may be some other organizations that also benefit. And, with that, I would be glad to yield.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Thank you --

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Representativ e Phillips yields.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Larry, are you aware that some of the organizations that are included in the benefit of your bill include Crisis Pregnancy Centers?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: It depends on -- I mean that's a general statement, the criteria of establishing will be on a case by case basis.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Well, Crisis Pregnancy Centers are in the universe of organizations that are eligible for consideration, isn't that right?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Can you say that again?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Crisis Pregnancy Centers are within the the universe of eligibility organizations that can take advantage of your bill, isn't that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Well, there may be some that fit into that definition. I'm not aware if All Crisis Pregnancy Centers -- in fact, most of them are -- I don't know about the make up of -- But there are certainly other centers out there that may. And I'm trying to be --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: But your legislation, I'm not asking you to be aware of Crisis Pregnancy Centers. But is it not true that your legislation does not rule them out, that they are a part of the universe of the eligible organizations?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I think there could be some that would be, depending on how they're set up, and depending on if they meet the qualifications.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Now that we've established that they are eligible organizations, are you aware --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Again, again, if they meet the criteria. So I can't argue blanketly that they are eligible. If they do these things and they meet the criteria and they meet what the department -- what the Attorney General sets up, then they would be qualified. So I don't want to blatantly say that every -- if you're this then you're automatically qualified.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Well, let me ask you another question. Are you ware that Crisis Pregnancy Centers pay their counselors $63 per hour --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't know --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: -- for their mentoring and counseling?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't know what you're talking about.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: All right. Do you know how much we reimburse pediatricians for caring for ill children in an office visit, under Medicaid?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't know the exact the exact numbers.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: It's about $37. And so what I'm trying to highlight is that we could do a better job at targeting our limited state dollars to organizations that are delivering meaningful, important, much needed and apparently less expensive services, like health care delivered by pediatricians and professional health care providers. Your bill leaves the door open to money being diverted to Crisis Pregnancy Centers, instead of these other organizations, which we happen to be cutting this session.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I see prenatal care as part of something this fund could be used for.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: But it opens it up beyond that particular service, does it not?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Providing of clothing, housing, food, utilities, transportation, provides for the needs for the infant.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: My amendment that you're speaking against brings certainty and accountability to the funding stream that you're creating. Now, it doesn't undo your license plate, it actually makes sure that the organizations that we know are licensed by the state, we can account for them, we check in on them, we make sure that they're doing their job; there's a lot of diligence involved, are the ones that benefit from this revenue stream. And I don't think -- Why not bring accountability to the revenue stream that you're creating?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't think the Attorney General's Office is going to allow to set up a program that does not have accountability. And that's exactly --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: You'd be surprised, because we've been funding Crisis Pregnancy Centers for multiple sessions now, and they have been failing their -- their accountability measures that we set up for them. They have yet to meet their measurable objectives that we, as a state, have set for them. And yet we still throw money at them.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: People that buy these choose to do this. No one is throwing money at them. It's the people that choose to buy license plates, they know where the funds are going to be going. Those organizations are going to be identified and they'll vote with their dollars.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: But we have a choice today to bring the accountability to the revenue stream that you are creating, and fund organizations that truly are delivering medical care and housing to these young women and their children.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And I would disagree that -- that by only having your amendment will there be accountability. I disagree with that. I think there will be accountability. If the organizations that you -- Like I said, I certainly welcome you to work with the Attorney General's Office to make sure that the very points that you're making is something that you could share with him, so when he sets up with the committee the criteria that that's something that they take into consideration.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: You're willing to allow the AG's Office to possibly meet an accountability standard when today, in this amendment, we can bring certainty to that question and make sure the revenue stream you're creating goes to maternity homes that are licensed by the state? Aren't there enough of them that need our help that are actually going to be cut this legislative session?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And just so you know, not all the maternity homes -- not all those are just for those waiting for adoption, either. I don't know if you know that. So that's the focus. This is focused just on adoption. Although many maternity homes are. So I would respectfully move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The Chair recognizes Representative Villarreal to close.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Thank you Madam Chair and members, my amendment is very simple, it brings accountability to this revenue stream that we are creating. Representative Phillips has stated that he doesn't want to take any amendments because he wants this bill to go directly to the Governor's Office. You and I know that there are House Bills that have yet to arrive on this floor that still have liability, in getting through the process, we have four weeks left. There's plenty of time to amend this bill and to send it to the Senate for confirmation. My amendment, I believe, improves this legislation by bringing accountability and making sure the revenue stream we are creating is going to organizations that are licensed and regulated by the state, organizations that we know are helping young women care for their babies, whether they are readying them up for adoption or getting them back on their feet to care for their own children. I ask for your consideration and ask you to vote against the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Representative Villarreal sends up an amendment. Representative Phillips moves to table. The question is on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote no. The clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Villarreal voting no. Showing Representative Phillips voting aye. Showing Representative Patrick voting no. Showing Representative Flynn voting aye. Have all members voted? There being 98 ayes and 43 nays, the motion to table prevails.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Castro.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The Chair recognizes Representative Castro.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Thank you Madam Speaker and members. I have two amendments. This first one, all it does is, if you notice in the bill, the bill creates an advisory committee to the Attorney General on how the Attorney General should distribute the money that is collected in the fund. My amendment simply says that a lobbyist who lobbies the State Legislature cannot serve as a member of that advisory committee. That's it. What I think is a very reasonable amendment. With that, I would move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The Chair recognizes --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you very much. I appreciate the bringing of this amendment, but this amendment is -- I'm going to move to table. As I've said, I would like to keep the bill clean as it is. This bill, I filed this very early. This bill has had many coauthors, people have known about this bill. We have the Senate Bill in front of us, and I don't think we should -- I'm not going to accept it at this time. I would like to move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Ms. Speake r, would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yes, I will.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Phillip s, you keep saying you want to keep the bill clean. So say I get a bill down maybe next week that comes over from the Senate, and I want to keep it clean, too. Will you not -- Will you not be supporting any of the amendment -- Will you not be authoring amendments?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: No, Ms. Farrar, I may do that and --

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: So thank you for being honest about it.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: But I would certainly talk to you about it. But here is the point: We've tried for many sessions to get this legislation passed and I'm not going to take a chance of it not getting through. It's been killed by point of orders by people all around us that are glad they've done. It's been stalled in the Senate in the past, and now we have an opportunity to get this passed and that's exactly why I move to table. And these concerns may be good concerns, and there's nothing wrong with you going to the Attorney General and Mr. Castro, and I'll be glad to do that. Go to the Attorney General and say Attorney General, we really don't want any of these type of people to serve on this advisory committee. It's an advisory committee, not a decision making committee. So I would respectfully move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: So I have got a bill coming over from the Senate, hopefully, and it's been killed several sessions. And so when I say no amendments, please, and this is here in the House chamber; do you think that's fair to the other members?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Members don't have to agree with me. They can say no, we want to accept these amendments. But I am asking to respect -- I'm asking to respect to go forward on this.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: So can you make the pledge to the rest of us who want to get a Senate Bill over here that just want our bills clean, so it can get to the governor's desk, to not offer amendments? Can you make that commitment here?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I think I've expressed my opinion already on that.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Can you give me a yes or no?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: No.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: So you won't do it for other people's bills, but you want us to do for your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I'm asking on this bill and this legislation. There are many times that I don't ask to put amendments on, because people ask not to.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yes, I'd be glad to.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Representa tive Phillips, isn't it true in your bill you exempt this advisory committee from the requirements of all other advisory committees that are outlined in the government code; that's the last line of the bill? And that includes -- And let me ask you, do you realize that that includes no Sunset provisions for the committee, so it goes on in perpetuity.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: This is an advisory committee. This is not a decision making committee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: There's already exemptions in the government --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And we have a statewide elected official, the Attorney General, that's listed here as the responsible maker. He or she will be the one making the decision, and this is simply an advisory committee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: The long or short of it is that you're creating a special kind of committee, with exemptions from the regular form of advisory committee, that are established in the government code. So isn't it the practical effect that there's no Sunset provision, so it goes on in perpetuity, that there's no evaluation of the effectiveness of the committee; so don't you think it's fair under those conditions that you accept an amendment that simply says that is we can't have somebody who lobbies the State Legislature, deciding how this money is distributed? What's wrong with that amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Well, what I'm saying is if you think that's an issue I think it's perfectly fine. We don't have to put that in statute. You can go to Attorney General and say hey, we would like to limit this. And, certainly, if, you know --

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: This is the Legislature and we can make this decision here and now. Would you allow postponing your bill to allow Senator Carona to consider whether or not he would accept this amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: No. I would like to pass it today and make sure that we get it out of here. So that's why I respectfully am moving to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: All right. So you're going to allow lobbyists to serve on this committee?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: That's not exactly what we said. Please vote no.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mrs. Speaker, would the gentleman yield? representative phil: I'd be glad to, Mr. Burnam.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you. Chairman Phillips, this is the fourth amendment that would redirect your funds on your bill to provide children services, one way or another, that you made a motion to table?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Well, this one wouldn't to that. This bill doesn't deal with that topic.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And you said that you would rater keep it clean. Would you be willing to postpone the bill for 30 minutes while we go ask Senator Carona?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: No. I would like to pass this legislation today, and so would those who have been trying to get this legislation passed for many, many years.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So would you be willing to entertain an amendment to direct the funding towards actual children services on third reading?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I'm going to ask that we not accept any amendments to this legislation.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And so what pot of money are you trying to protect? representative phil: I'm not trying to protect any money. I'm trying to get this legislation passed today.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well, right. But there's a pot of funds in theory that will generated if anybody buys these license plates --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Mr. Burnam , I think they will buy these license plates. And they're going to buy it if they know its going to go the way it's put out in this bill. That's the way I believe.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Right. And it's set out in the bill that it's going to go where?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Well, we've been through that. The organization that meet the criteria that will be established through the Attorney General's Office, and certainly do these remarkable things to help promote adoption. And would you like me to go through that again?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: No, I'm fine with that. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I would move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The Chair recognizes Representative Castro to close.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Members, this is a very straightforward amendment. All it says is that on the advisory committee, the folks that advise the Attorney General on how this money is going to be spent, there cannot be a registered lobbyist on that advisory committee.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Mr. Walle, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Would Representative Castro yield for just a few questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: I would.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Would you yield, Representative Castro? The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you. Representative Castro, do you think that there might be some conflict of interest if a lobbyist potentially could serve on this board?

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Absolutely there can be. You know, somebody that is a lobbyist who would serve on this advisory committee is coming here during the and obviously pushing whatever agenda they may have and, at the same time, sitting on an official state advisory committee on about how state money is going be distributed to certain organizations. So if you upset a lobbyist, or if you do this or that, there's a real conflict of interest in that person also being able to sit on this advisory committee.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Right. And there could be those types of battles that go on, there could be some retribution or some lobbyist trying to get back at another member for not voting particularly the way that they want. It is more than a slippery slope, wouldn't you think?

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: I agree. And we would hope that that doesn't happen, but this bill certainly opens up that possibility without this amendment coming on.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And you're just trying to make sure that -- because it's inevitable that this bill would pass, but we're trying to make it to where it's more palatable to some folks that would vote in favor of it. Because, in my view, this amendment is a great amendment, so that folks can have an idea of -- they're not in cahoots with a member of the lobby or --

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: That's right. And, Representative Walle, I think it's especially important in this bill because, as I mentioned, and I think Representative Villarreal mentioned, this bill creates a special committee that is outside the purview, in other words, not subject to the ordinary regulations of state advisory committees that are outlined in the Government Code. So there's no Sunset provision, there's no evaluation of the committee, there's no real oversight of the committee. And so this is at least one small way, and I think a reasonable way, that we can put some checks and balances on this advisory committee.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And the terms and conditions of a member of this committee, as you mentioned, falls outside of any kind of regulation, any oversight that the House -- it's all contingent on -- are they all -- I'm assuming they are -- the governor appoints these folks?

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: And the Attorney General, I believe.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And the Attorney General? Okay. I know your amendment is very simple, as it bans as member of the lobby from participating on this -- on this committee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Would you think that postponing the bill would be --

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Well, you know, I know that Representative Phillips has expressed that he doesn't want any amendments on this bill because he would like to send it cleanly back to the Senate. Now, bear in mind that this is May 3rd, we have until May 9th, I believe, or May 11th, I believe, or 12th, to vote on House Bills. So we've got more than a week to figure this out. We have even later deadlines to handle Senate Bills and conference committee bills, and that deadline is even further along. So this is not, you know, we're not the last minute of the fourth quarter here. We still have time to work on this.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And your amendment is a good, ethical, good government amendment that would allow, you know, just to make sure we're not doing something that we shouldn't be doing, and allowing a member of the lobby to --

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Right. And without the oversight written into the bill, this is some way on the face of the bill, in the written language of the the bill, to make sure that everything is kept clean.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Right. And this is only my second session, and you're a senior member, you have been here a long time. What's actually written in the bill sometimes doesn't happen in practice.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: That's right. You know, once the legislature goes away then, in practice, things sometimes break down, unless we have very carefully detailed how we want things to be done.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Yes, I do.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Representat ive Castro, it may surprise you to know this but I intend to vote SB257 today, because I believe that my constituents should have the choice to pay this additional fee for this bill, for this license plate. But what I like about your amendment is that they would be free and knowing that their state representatives voted -- if we vote to support your amendment, voted not to have lobbyists who lobby the Legislature sit on this committee that's going to sit -- this new committee sitting outside the boundaries of oversight that we normally have, voting on where this money is going. I mean, there could be -- I mean the headline could read, "Legislators vote to allow lobbyists to sit on special new committee". Could it not be --

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Representative Miller raises a point of order. That the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: I believe there's an amendment to the amendment. I move adoption of the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Representative Castro sends up an amendment. Representative Phillips moves to table. The question is on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote no. The clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Castro voting no. Showing Representative Taylor voting aye. Representative Farrar voting no. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? Being 95 ayes, 45 nays; the motion to table prevails. The following -- The Chair recognizes Representative Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Mrs. Speaker and members, I request permission for the Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety to meet while the House is in session today, time will be 4:30 today, May 3rd, place will be upstairs, 3W15. We're going to consider pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I move to suspend the five day posting rule and all necessary rules to allow the Committee on Civil Jurisprudence to consider some additional Senate Bills that were inadvertently left off of our agenda that was posted. Senate Bills 82, 250, 331, 480, 485, 604, 841, 877, 1200, 1331 and 1416. Our meeting is upon adjournment today, in Reagan Room 120.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. Following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety will meet at 4:30 p.m. on May the 3rd, 2011, at 3W.15. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business. The Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence will meet upon adjournment on May the 3rd, 2011, at JHR120. This will be a public hearing to consider SB82, SB250, SB331, SB480, SB485, SB604, SB841, SB877, SB1200, SB1331, and SB1416.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The Chair recognizes Representative Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Memb ers, we announce that the Human Services Committee will be meeting at 4:00 o'clock in 3W9, we're still doing that meeting as soon as we're through with SB257.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Madam Doorkeeper?

MADAM DOORKEEPER: Madam Speaker, I have a messenger from the Senate at the door of the House.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Admit the messenger.

SENATE MESSENGER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm directed by the Senate to inform the House that the Senate has taken the following actions:

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Castro.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Chair recognizes Representative Castro.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: All right, members, as promised I had two amendments. This is the second one. The second one deals with how these organizations that receive these funds can use those funds. My amendment says that money received by an eligible organization under this section may not be used to pay for lobbying expenses. So what we're asking is that any money that is given to these organizations by the state is not used for any lobbying purposes. And, with that, I would move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The Chair recognizes Representative Phillips to speak in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you very much. This amendment is not necessary, and I will move to table. It's very clearly put out in the statute of what is permissible. We don't have to go through and define all the permissible things to make the legislation clear. It's very specific. Money received by an eligible organization may be spent only to provide -- Otherwise, we have to start having all kinds of language of every type of situation that you would exclude spending money on. So this is not necessary. It's already in the statute, because there's nothing in here mentioning that you could spend it on that. And so I think it's just again -- I would move to table, respectfully.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Madam Speaker, would the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: For a question.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yes, I will.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Representa tive Phillips, can you take me back to the section in the bill that you're referring to?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: You bet. You need to go back to F, section F.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Which page is that, two?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: It's page two. Money received by an eligible organization under this section may be spent only to provide -- And it sets that all out.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: It says to provide training and advertising relating to adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Advertising ?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Relating to adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: What kind of advertising are you talking about?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Advertisin g relating to adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Advertisin g can be lobbying, can't it? If we handed out a flier to the Legislature promoting a certain position on an issue, that's not advertising?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Mr. Castro , I think you're taking this --

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: What fundamental disagreement do you have with me about this issue about prohibiting lobbying --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't have a fundamental disagreement.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: -- using this money to lobby?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I have a fundamental disagreement with you putting it in a bill that's not necessary, because we have exclusively in there what's excluded. And by voting with me -- No, listen. By voting with me on the motion to table, no one is saying that they favor this money going to lobbying. It's specifically not allowed. It may be spent only on the following things --

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: No, it says advertising in there.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Advertisin g is not lobbying, and you know that. That's why you didn't put may not be spent on lobbying or advertising. You didn't put advertising in yours, you just put lobbying.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: I think lobbying could be included in advertising. And so, by not putting it in the amendment, you're leaving open the possibility that money could be used for lobbying. But, Representative Phillips --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Let's establish legislative intent, let's do that now. It's our legislative intent that advertising relating to adoption in no way relates to lobbying. I put that as legislative intent. That's my intent. And by voting to table your amendment the other members are going to show their legislative intent to comply with mine.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Okay. Well, we disagree on that. But let me ask you another question, you agreed earlier that you couldn't name a single organization that was eligible under our bill.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: That's because the criteria has not been assessed by the Attorney General's Office.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: But you have no idea at all of any kind of organization, any name of any organization that qualifies?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: We've talked about different possible entities.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Well, give me the name of one.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I'm not going to say this one or that one.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Then what's this bill for?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: It's to establish -- to establish choose life license plates that will provide assistance to organizations that are yet to be determined, that fit the criteria that do these things that help promote adoption. And for me to pick an organization one way or the other so you can go out and say what about this organization that does this, or what about this organization that does that?

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Well, let me ask you what I think is a fair question, were there any organizations that came and testified who you think might be eligible that testified in the favor of the bill?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't have that list of who all testified this time. There were those that supported it. I don't know.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: You don't recall one?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I don't think there were any specifically that did meet that criteria necessarily, that fits in there. But I don't recall. I apologize. That's why I --

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: So I mean the long and or short of it is that we don't know who qualifies, the advisory committee has no oversight, we have not barred the lobbyists from the committee and now we don't bar them from using the money for lobbying expenses?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I disagree. And I think that you're -- I think that's an inappropriate characterization and I disagree. And I respectfully move to table your amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Chair recognizes Representative Castro to close.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Members, you'll notice in the provision that governs what organizations can do with this money there is a mention of advertising, which is an incredibly inclusive term, an incredibly inclusive term. By accepting this amendment we're simply saying, making it clear, that an organization cannot pay for any kind of lobbying by accepting the state's money. Now I offer the amendment also in light of the fact that the specifics on this bill have been either rather vague, in that the author has not named a single organization that might qualify, or has been somewhat disturbing, because the entire committee is exempted from any type of governmental code oversight. No Sunset provision, no evaluation on an annual basis, which is standard for other committees; so we're essentially creating a committee that can do whatever it wants, that can be controlled by whomever. In light of those facts, I think this is quite a reasonable amendment that simply says that you can't use this money to lobby. With that, I move passage. Or, actually, I move against the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Representative Castro sends up an amendment. Representative Phillips moves to table the amendment. The question is on the motion to table. Vote aye or vote no. The clerk will ring the bell. Representative Castro is voting no. Representative Farrar voting no. Representative Phillips voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 95 ayes, 47 nays; the motion to table prevails. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Chair recognizes Representative Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mrs. Speak er, members, this amendment says that if you represent an organization that receives funds from this fund, you are not eligible to serve on the advisory committee. It goes along the lines with some of what Representative Castro's concerns were, and that there were be conflicts of interest if perhaps there was a lobbyist that represented one of these organizations. This says that anybody who might be benefiting from the fund would not be able to make decisions about directing funds toward their organizations. And this clarifies any situation that we might find ourselves, this body, and headlines in the future when there might be some sort of impropriety. I ask you to vote against the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you very much Madam Speaker and members, I would move to table. Again, these kind of concerns -- I have great respect for the Attorney General, and I'm not concerned that they're going to establish these things. And there's nothing wrong with any of the -- Contact the Attorney General's Office and say hey, we've got a concern about these type of entities serving on the advisory panel. Again, at the end of the day it's an advisory panel and the Attorney General is going to make the decision. And again, I would ask you to vote with me, yes to table.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Chair recognizes Representative Farrar to close.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I would just say Mr. Speaker, members, that if you vote for the motion to table that you're saying it's okay, that you would allow the potential for a receiving organization to have someone on the board directing funds toward that organization. I'd ask you to be very deliberate in that decision. Vote no on the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Representative Farrar sends up an amendment. Representative Phillips moves to table. The question occurs on the motion to table. Vote aye or vote no. Showing Representative Phillips voting aye. Showing Representative Farrar voting no. Have all members voted? Showing Representative Villarreal voting no. Have all members voted? Showing Representative Deshotel voting no. Have all members voted? Being 96 ayes and 47 nays, the motion to table prevails. Please excuse Representative Harper Brown for important business in the district, on a motion by Representative Taylor. Is there anyone wishing to speak on for or against --

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Parliamenta ry inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Is there a difference between meeting on final adjournment or recess or just final adjournment?

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: No.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Is there anyone else wishing to speak on, for, or against Senate Bill 257? The Chair recognizes Representative Farrar to speak in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speake r, members, this bill is seriously flawed. Several members have amendments to clarify potential conflicts of interest. We also offered to have other messages on the plate that were not so political. And so I would just tell you that we have a situation here where there's one side of a political opinion that is going to be expressed in this bill, and we are not allowing for the opposite opinion to be expressed because, as it was said earlier, it is not likely that this body would approve such a measure. So, with that, I would ask you to vote no on the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips to close.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you for your patience. I appreciate all the coauthors on this legislation and for your patience today. And I respectfully ask each of you to vote for this bill. And I would move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Members, the question occurs on passage to third reading of Senate Bill 257. Representative Walle, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Madam Speaker, I raise a point of order against further consideration of SB257, under Rule 4, Section 18 A of the rules of the house (inaudible) the 82nd Legislature on the grounds of the committee (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH DAVIS: Will you bring your point of order down front? Point of order. Representative Walle raises a point of order under Rule 4, Section 18A of the rules of the House. The Chair has reviewed the minutes and finds that they are in order, and the point of order is respectfully overruled. Members, the question occurs on passage to third reading of Senate Bill 257. Representative Alonzo requests strict enforcement and strict enforcement is granted. Members, please vote from your desks. Members, the question occurs on passage to third reading. Please vote from your seat. You may not vote for any other member. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? There's plenty of time, so return to your desk and vote. Have all members now voted? Going last time, have all members voted? There being 94 ayes and 29 nays, Senate Bill 257 passes to third reading.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: The Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 257. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB257 by Hildebrand. Relating to the periods for presumed abandonment of certain unclaimed personal property.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Chair recognizes Mr. Hildebrand.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Members, this is a bill that is a legislative budget board of recommendation that set a nontax revenue of 78 million for the state. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment -- Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: If I could ask Representative Hildebrand about the bill before we go to the amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: All right. Mr. Hildebrand, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Sure.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On the first part, dealing with the utilities deposits, I know right now that the waiting period is three years and the bill reduces it to one year on utility deposits.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And the reason why I raise it, because when we're given it to one year, that's not giving much time to make their claims on the deposits.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: I understand your concern about that, and that was probably the only -- that was probably the primary areas I was studying, the legislative budget board of recommendation concerned me. However, in the state that we are in, in terms of our revenue conditions, I looked at this over, and out of all the ten legislative budget board of recommendations that would bring revenue in, I thought this was the most attractive of all of them, because each of them, you know -- And a number of them were introduced, and quite a few of them came through our committee, and some others went to other committees. But, out of all of them, I was surprised that this wasn't picked up by another member. And I filed it, and Mrs. Harper Brown filed it, and that's why she joined me as a joint author of it. But basically, yeah, you know, that's -- ideally, you wouldn't do that. But we're not in an ideal climate.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And the only section that I'm raising a question about, Representative Hildebrand, is the one dealing with utility deposits.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: And I'm saying I share your concern about it and, ideally, we wouldn't shorten it to one year, but we find ourselves in a condition where we're short revenue in this. When you consider everything, I'll tell you one thing, what I tell the folks in the committee, regardless of whether it was money orders or any other unclaimed personal property, including the utility deposits, if I wake up two or three years from now I find out that I missed getting my deposit refunded because I was late by a little period of time, I would not like it. But the today, with what we're faced with, this $78 million for the (inaudible) and this is subject for this year and the next biennium.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And one of the reasons of concern though, Harvey, is that many of the people that are paying these deposits are also the ones that are receiving the discounts on their electricity bills, and they're being forced to pay the deposit. My concern is that we are already -- we are already taking the discount money, so that is already being taken in the budgetary process already, and there is --

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: This bill doesn't do that, right?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: No. But this is the deposit. This is when they're paying on the front end. And what I'm saying is that many of these people that are paying deposits are also recipients of the discount, and they're not getting the discounts, because we're already taking that money.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: How does your amendment correct that?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Are you willing to --

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: That's why I was wanting to hear about it so I know how it works.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: My amendment takes out the utility deposit.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: So it takes out the whole section?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Of the utility deposit.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: My first reaction to that is that I would like to know what that cost is, you know, does that take if -- what portion of the $78 million is derived from that section?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I have my staff asking that question right now.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: I would like to know that. Because, if you were saying why don't we extend that a number of months to make sure it's not just 12 months, so let's make it 13 or 15; I would accept that. Because then we're given a little more time so someone is about to move into another apartment, and they've been there a year, and it gives them a little bit of time, I would be open to that.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Would you be willing then to accept an amendment then, instead? Because the amendment I have up there takes the section totally out.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: No, I would rather you extend it.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: What about an amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: If you're willing to extend it, I'm open to that.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Instead, it's presently three years. Can we reduce it to two?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: How about 18 months?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Come on, Harvey, it's two years.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: We're negotiating. Come on back and let's figure it out. Your amendment is next.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: My amendment is coming up.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Well, come over here and let's talk about it.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Excuse Representative Larry Gonzalez because of illness, on the motion of Representative Otto. Please excuse Representative Ann Taylor for a committee meeting on Human Services, on the motion of Representative Otto. Chair recognizes Representative Keffer for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES L. KEFFER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request permission for the Committee on Energy Resources to meet while the House is in session at 5:15 p.m. today, 5/3/11, at 3W.9 to consider pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Members, you heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Energy Resources will meet at 5:15 p.m. on May the 3rd, 2011, at 3W.9. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Please excuse Representative Todd Hunter because of Human Services, on the motion by Representative Guillen. Chair recognizes Mr. Hildebrand.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Mr. Spe aker, members, I move to postpone further consideration of House Bill 257 until 7:00 p.m. this evening, which will be on May 3rd at 7:00 p.m., so we can look at some amendments and the numbers impact on this bill if we take the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Members, you heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair lays out House Bill 300. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB300 by Kolkhorst. Relating to the privacy of protected health information; providing a civil penalty.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Chair recognizes Mrs. Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members, I'm happy to lay out Committee Substitute House Bill 300, which is a patient information protection bill that has been worked on by the Public Health Committee, with an interim charge from the Speaker of the House. We have met with stakeholders over a number of months now, and it's a result of a lot of hard work. And the attempt and the real push of this bill is to protect your health records as we move into the electronic age. As you-all know, we received $30 million to begin the HIT Development for Electronic Health Networks. And so this prohibits the sale of your data, the most sensitive data, and also sets up auditing and allows us to build upon the high-tech act passed by Congress. I do have two clarifying amendments and then I think there is one more amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Chair recognizes Mrs. Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members. This amendment is a perfecting amendment agreed upon by the stakeholders who have worked on committee substitute House Bill 300, including the Texas Medical Association and Texas Health -- Texas Hospital Association and Texas Alliance. It does a couple of important things. It clarifies the definition of disclosure to prevent the disclosure outside the entity holding the information. And it clears up the update to the HIPAA laws to September 1, 2011. And it also incorporates a stakeholder request to use the word egregious to define violations, instead of serious. Lastly, the amendment clarifies what information is required for audits and how those audits should be conducted. Members, I move passage of this amendment and it's acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Members, the is amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment. Please excuse Representative Pitts because of important business, on the motion of Representative Chisum.

CLERK: Amendment by Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Chair recognizes Representative Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The second amendment is something that we worked on. It goes into Chapter 602 of the Insurance Code. This amendment is designed to ensure that the regulations for life and disability insurers are not duplicative. Life, disability and other insurers are regulated under Chapter 602 of the Insurance Code. When we put them into 3200, they had originally requested that -- after some study, we realized that they would be double regulated, and we didn't want to do that. So it does, however, it does prohibit them from the sale of data in this provision. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. The Chair recognizes Representative Phillips to lay House Bill 238 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Simpson? Members, we're waiting on an amendment to be filed. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Simpson.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Chair recognizes Mr. Simpson.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is a simple amendment that I believe is acceptable to the author. This will amend page 13 and add between lines 20 and 21 the following statement: At least one private citizen who represents the patient and parental rights be added to this committee. I believe the amendment is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: The amendment is acceptable to the author, even though it was late. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Mrs. Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members, Representative Simpson wanted to make sure that a public member was represented on the task force. I think that's a good addition. And, in closing, I want to thank Representative Naishtat who has walked this walk with me, and he and his staff have been a great help on this bill, a very complicated bill. But, in essence, we can say to our constituents that we tried to -- there is a great attempt in protecting their private data, their health records as we move into the electronic age. So thank you, Representative Naishtat, for your leadership on this issue. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Does anyone wish to speak on, for, or against the bill? If not, the question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 300. All those in favor say aye, opposed nay. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 528. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB528 by Solomons. Relating to the provision of pharmaceutical services through informal and voluntary networks in the Workers' Compensation system; providing a administrative violation.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members, this bill fixes what an unintended consequence of some Worker's Comp. law that we had from last session, and it requiring network certification inadvertently included pharmacy care. And so this bill would not require the PBMs to become certified health care networks, but would authorize their participation in the the Worker's Comp. program. So, therefore, the informal, voluntary registered network. And I move passage. I'm sorry, I have an amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Yes, this amendment really cleaned up some language in the code. I think what it did -- Oh, yeah, under this amendment it removes some language under the current fee guideline statute to this chapter on pharmacies to ensure that the system knows that the chapter controls on how to pay pharmacies in the Worker's Comp. system. And it's acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: It's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection of adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 528? The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 528. All those in favor say aye, opposed nay. So ordered. Please excuse Representative Bonnen on important business in the district on a motion by Representative Harless. Chair lays out on second read House Bill 681. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB681 by Kleinschmidt. Relating to an employees transportation and storage of certain firearms and ammunition while on certain property owned or controlled by the employee's employer.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 681 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 321. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB321 by Hagar. Relating to an employee's transportation and storage of certain firearms an ammunition while on certain property owned or controlled by the employee's employer.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Chair recognizes Mr. Kleinschmidt.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Thank you Mr. Speaker, members --

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: I raise a point of order.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Bring your point forward. Representative Burnam raises a point of order the. The point of order is respectfully overruled. That brings us back to Senate Bill 321. The Chair recognizes Mr. Kleinschmidt.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Thank you Mr. Speaker, members, under Texas law Texans who are legally eligible to possess firearms may lawfully transport them in their motor vehicles. Some do so to protect themselves in a lawful and responsible manner, others routinely transport firearms in their cars and trucks with plans for hunting or to visit the local shooting range club. You don't need a concealed handgun license to carry a legal handgun rifle or shotgun in your car or truck in Texas. Some companies with Texas operations have adopted a no firearms policy that extends beyond the physical workplace to include the employee parking lot. These areas are often accessible to the general public and not secured. These policies usually start or begin from corporate headquarters located outside of Texas or outside of the United States, and they don't take into account our Texas firearm laws or our strong fording culture. Such policies force employees to chose between protecting themselves during their commutes to work, or being subject to termination by their employers, or disciplined by their employers, and that's not a choice that we want to make hardworking Texans to make. Allowing Texas workers to keep their legally owned firearms locked in their private motor vehicles, even when parked on their employer's parking lot, strikes a reasonable balance between individual Second Amendment rights and corporate property rights. This bill does not prohibit an employer from regulating and enforcing policies banning the possession or carrying of firearms inside their business or work place. Members, this is a parking lot only bill. The bill provides immunity from -- limited immunity from liability to employers for damage resulting from the transportation and storage of firearms by employees under this act. This bill does not apply to places that are federally or statutorily prohibited by state law, it does not apply to school districts, charter schools, private schools or properties subject to a valid, unexpired oil and gas lease. There is a carve out, it does not apply to chemical plants and oil and gas refineries, except that they cannot prohibit a person with a CHL from carrying it on their parking lot. It does prohibit it from their secured areas. This bill is similar in legislation passed in 14 other states, including our neighbors in Oklahoma and Louisiana. Members, currently in the State of Texas there are more than 400,000 concealed handgun license carriers. I know there are a couple of amendments.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Representative Lewis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Would the gentleman yield for some questions?

JOE STRAUS: Kleinschmidt, would you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Representative Kleinschmidt, I have some questions for you with regards to the Section 52.063, which is immunity from civil liability. Do you have that before you?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Excuse me, sorry, somebody was talking. Can you repeat that?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Yes. I have some questions about Section 52.063, which is immunity from civil liability. I was wondering if you have that language before you.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes, I do.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: The persons or entities made immune in this are -- It says an employer, public or private employer, or the employer's agent. By the term agent, did you mean to use an expansive use of that term?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes, including any agent. Including anyone that is representing the employer in the workplace.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: All right. Would that term include -- For your purposes, did you intend it to include people like the the employer, the principals of the business, the parters, owners and so forth?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: The principals, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: All right. Would you mean to include the officers, the directors and the employees in the term agent?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: So for clarity sake, if we listed those individuals or those titles, that would not change your intent when you drafted this; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No, but I do believe that the intent is clear as it is.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: All right. Now, with regard to that term, isn't it true that the courts will usually give a meaning of a -- when you're giving immunity to someone from liability, they'll usually use the strictest meaning of the term available when they're doing that; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: That's possible.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: And so there are lots of meanings of intent, and some of them are very -- pardon me, there are lots of meanings of the term agent, and some of them can be very strict with regard to someone that's charged with a duty on a particular transaction to represent a principal with regard to a third party, it can go all the way from that up to -- that's a tricky term to include that and go up to employee/employer relationship, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: We trust you district judges to use a lot of common sense.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: All right. Thank you. Now, further down, the immunity is when, in essence, that arises out of an occurrence involving a firearm or ammunition transported or stored in accordance with Section 52061; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: And Section 52061 requires that the vehicle that has the firearm in it be locked; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: And did you mean here for the employers and the agent to only have immunity if, in fact, the vehicle was locked?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Okay. So if, in fact, that's what that means, that is not what you're meaning was, that it had to be in accordance with the terms of 52061; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I do not expect the employers to have to police the vehicles for being locked or unlocked.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: As long as the firearm was transported or stored on the property under a right to do so provided by this subchapter, that would capture your meaning there in what you want it to do, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I'm not following you on that one.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Well, as long as you're not trying to say that the vehicle had to be locked or anything, what you're really trying to say by this provision is if the firearm was on the premises pursuant to a right granted here by this subchapter that you're drafting here, that the employer is immune from suit, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes. But I'm also intending that the employers require to keep the vehicle locked if there's a firearm in it.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Right. But if the employee doesn't do that, you're not trying to put liability on the employer?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Okay. Also let me ask this: When you drafted this, did you mean by having these provisions allowing the firearm to be transported on to the property, did you have the employer or the employer or the employers' principal officers, directors, employers or agents, to impose on them any duty to patrol, inspect or secure the parking lot, parking garage or parking area that the employer provides for the employee? Did you mean to place the --

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No. More than what, what would presently exist under the laws and the common laws of the State of Texas. I'm not trying to create any new duties.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Okay. Did mean to create any duty to investigate, confirm or determine an employee's compliance with the laws related to ownership or possession of a firearm on the employer?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No, I'm not trying to add any knew duties on the employer.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Okay. So by this immunity I take it that you're not placing -- you want them to be immune from liability, and that would include a duty to make sure that the employees are in compliance with the laws when they -- when they bring these firearms on the premises; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Under Senate Bill 321, the employers are exempt from liability, except for their gross negligence.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: All right. Thank you very much.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Farias, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes.

JOE STRAUS: The Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Representative Kleinschmidt, in the workforce where I come from there was a lot of folks that would go shoot dove in the evening, or go hunting, and they would leave from the workplace to their deer lease. And so the company allowed them to bring in weapons to hunt with, but not handguns in their vehicles. Does your bill limit the number of handguns that one can have in a particular vehicle?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: It does not? Does it limit -- Can it be an automatic weapon?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I'm not advised as to automatic weapons. I'm not attempting to allow anyone who seeks to illegally possess firearms. So any firearm that would come under the aspect of a legal firearm to be in the vehicle.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: So how about the caliber gun? They carry anything that they are authorized to carry?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I'm sorry, I didn't catch that.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Caliber. Can they carry any caliber gun that they can be authorized to carry?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Are you saying cowboy gun?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Caliber, the caliber. The size of the round.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Oh, oh, no. My bill is not limited to any caliber or size of gun.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: What happens if that individual comes out and there's shooting on the premises and children are hurt, who is responsible?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Nothing more than what would happen under the current law. I mean, guns are already in the parking lot, so this would not change that situation from the standpoint of a gun that is illegally on the parking lot.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: So there's no limit of number of guns that can be carried into a parking lot of a workplace?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Correct. The bill does not limit it.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: They can carry as many as they want to?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: I'm not against your bill, I want you to know that. I'm not against your bill. But I want to make sure that we're doing the right thing. Will there be training for these employees if they're bringing in guns? Who is responsible for this if they don't have a license to carry?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: My bill does not require training. Of course, you understand that CHL holders undergo training and testing for the -- to obtain and continue to keep their concealed handgun licenses.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: So if this law passes, the company is not liable for the training or instruction and/or notifying the employees of the problems that are with workplace violence?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: That would be my opinion.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Do you know how many people have died through workforce violence?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I'm sorry, I'm having a little trouble hearing you. Say it again.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Do you know how many people have died from workforce violence?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No, I don't.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Have you ever dwelt with any individuals that had to attend anger managements because of their tempers?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes, I have.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: You have? And do you think -- do you think that folks that have to be sent to deal with anger management should be carrying handguns on the premises?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I don't think the employer -- Are you talking anger management in connection with an employment situation?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: No, I'm asking you, do you believe that somebody that you had to send to anger management, would you allow them and be happy or be okay with them to carry weapons?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I believe in the law as it exists in the State of Texas today for a person to legally own and possess a firearm, whether that's under a concealed handgun license permit or otherwise a legally possessed firearm. I do not believe in subjective means that cannot be verified of limiting firearm ownership in the State of Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Okay. So with this bill we're actually taking away the authority of the employer to protect their employees with workforce violence; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No. I don't think so.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: We are not telling the employers you have no say so in this, because this bill will allow them to do that?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Will allow them to do what?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: So the employer, if this bill passes, the employer will not have a say so as to whether I can bring a weapon on to the property, so we're not taking that authority?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Well, let's not use the word property, because the employer still has the right to ban firearms from their buildings, from anywhere other than the parking lot. Like I said a while ago, this is a parking lot only bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: It's still on their property. That's why I'm asking.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Say it again, please.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: It's still on their property.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: It's still on their property, that's correct. We're trying to achieve a balance of Second Amendment rights and private property rights here, Mr. Farias. Most of us in the State of Texas virtually see our vehicles as an extension of our home. We travel, we commute, we expect to be able to protect ourselves when we commute.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Representative , I don't disagree with you. I agree with that part. I'm just asking the question about the employer. We're taking that -- the authority away from the employer and making a decision where they want guns on their properties. I understand. I truly understand. I'm just saying what are we doing to the employer?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: The employer will be required to allow legally possessed firearms in locked vehicles in their parking lots.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: But can they deny them with this bill? Will they be able to deny them on the parking lot?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Not in the parking lot, I hope.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Representative Dutton, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Woul d the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Than k you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Mr. Kleinschmidt, as I understand your bill it only affects licensed handgun folks to be able to take the gun into the parking lot.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No, that's not correct.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . So it applies to everybody who has a gun?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: It applies to people that legally possess a firearm in the State of Texas and are concealed handgun license owners.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Tell me who that includes, then. I understand people who have a concealed permit. Who else?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Well, people that are allowed to own a firearm, that aren't convicted felon, for instance.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Peop le that are what?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: People that aren't convicted felons, that are allowed to own a firearm.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Right . Who would that be?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Virtuall y anyone that is not a convicted felon.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: So your bill allows everybody who is not a convicted felon, whether you have a license or not, to take a gun to work and at least have it in the car and the parking lot, to take it into the parking lot of the employer; is that right or is that not right?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No, that's not right.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . Tell me what's wrong with that.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: If it's not otherwise prohibited by state or federal law.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . I'm trying to figure out who would that exclude then?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: It doesn't initially exclude anyone but someone who cannot legally possess a firearm.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And I'm trying to find out --

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Well, I'm trying to give you an example. A convicted felon.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . Other than a convicted felon, who else is excluded --

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I'm not advised.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Hold on. You don't know who else it would exclude?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No. I don't.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: You have no idea? Well, let me ask you a question, is that why you have to limit the liability of an employer then? What's the reason for that?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: The reason there is because we're trying to strike a reasonable balance between Second Amendment rights of our citizens and private property owners. That's the reason.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But that doesn't explain why you need to change the liability of employers, I don't understand that.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: It obviously worries employers. We have had a lot of input. We had a lot of give and take on this particular bill. We went to committee and we had a lot of give and take outside of it.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I'm not sure I understand you, I can't hear you very well.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: We worked very hard to try and obtain a reasonable balance between gun owners' rights, Second Amendment rights and the rights of employers' private property.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And I have no problem with that. But what I have a problem is, and what I'm trying to understand is, why do you need to limit the liability of an employer?

JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The gentleman's point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker, could I move to extend the gentleman's time?

JOE STRAUS: First extension of time. Is there objection? Chair hears none.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Than k you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Kleinschmidt. I'm trying to understand. I understand you-all struck some balance, but my question is if it's licensed people have guns, I assume they've gone through a class, I assume they know the law regarding usage of the firearm, and so my question is why then, does that have to change anything related to the liability of an employer?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Well, I don't believe it does. Right now there are guns in the parking lots already.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Beca use what?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Because there are already guns in the parking lots of most employment places in the State of Texas. And employers know that. It doesn't -- I'm not trying to change their liability, okay. And that's why we have the immunity -- we have the immunity provision in the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Let me ask you this way, Mr. Kleinschmidt; do employers have any liability for people having guns in their parking lots today?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No, I don't think so.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: So they have no liability on what happens if an employee brings a gun on to their parking lot?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: They would have to be found negligent in a court of law, under our existing statutes, to have any liability. They would have to -- in order to have -- they would have to either have some omission or action or negligence that would make them liable under our current law.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Then why do you need change liability in your bill for employers, then?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Because we are stepping into a private property rights issue, and it's a trade off, like anything in life with a trade off.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But wait, hold on, see if you can follow me; first you tell me there are already guns in the parking lot, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And the employers don't have liability except in a limited instance?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Well, that's my opinion. Unless they commit some act of negligence, and I'm giving them some immunity for ordinary negligence. We're trying to only protect them from a gross negligence situation?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . What I'm trying to understand is why we need to limit or change the liability of employers. Do you understand my question?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Because we are affecting their property rights, that's why.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . And how are we affecting their property rights?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: By permitting the presence of firearms on their parking lot over their --

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But you just told me that firearms were already on the parking lot before your bill.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: They are.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well then how is this going to change it or affect that?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: They still to be -- Like I'm trying to explain, to be liable in the State of Texas, you're not automatically liable for just the existence of any one thing or condition. In the State of Texas you have to commit some act that would be negligent, in order to be liable in the State of Texas. As long as the employer doesn't commit some act of negligence with the existing firearm, he's got no liability or that employer has got no liability.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Now you got to the heart of my question. What act of negligence do you think an employer could commit that necessitates us changing liability for the employer? I mean, under your bill, all you're doing, as it seems to me, based on what you've said, is that you're legitimizing what is already occurring right? They are already bringing the guns into the parking lot, your bill will legitimize that. But you go one step further and you say well, we're going to change the liability for employers, and that's the part where I'm having difficulty making the connection.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: And I understand your difficulty, because it does require a melding, so to speak, of the employers' property rights and the individuals' Second Amendment rights.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But they're already being violated, right?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: You can't take this situation -- We have restrictions for properties all across the State of Texas for many other reasons much less important than a person's personal safety on their commute. What we've given up -- What we've done here is requiring the employer to accept this restriction on their property to allow the firearms. What we've done is we've given them some protection against anything that could happen.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But I don't understand what the need for the protection is.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Deshotel.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Thank you. Mr. Dutton, I was going to -- Since you had to ask the question several times, I'm going to tell you exactly why the liability --

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I thank you. I appreciate that.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Liability was given up for the simple reason to get the bill past the business community. It was a negotiated bill, as I will speak to later. Once we allow what we already know happens, we know -- I know people in my area that those guys have guns in all their cars, they've been having it since the refinery was there; to make it legal, the business community said okay, if you're going allow this by law we want something in return. And that's when we negotiated to gross negligence. We changed it to gross negligence, if there's gross negligence you remain liable. And the reason for the gross negligence is because we don't want a situation to occur where an employee calls and says I'm coming in there tomorrow with my gun in my car and I'm going to take it out and I'm going to go in there and kill John Smith. And the employer can say okay, come on, because I have absolute immunity, like the amendment that's about to come on that would give absolute immunity. So we negotiated gross negligence to give some burden on the employer to have some responsibility but that would relieve them of some responsibility as well.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Now so, essentially, the employers wanted this exemption under the liability statute; whatever liability they might have been exposed under the current situation, they wanted some limit to that liability if we're going to legitimize it?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Yes. And we went even further than that for certain businesses. For heavy industry, oil and gas, chemical plants that had high pressure vessels and things in that area, an employee must have a concealed carry license to carry a gun in their car on those parking lots.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . So someplaces you don't have to have a concealed handgun permit?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Does that mean that if -- I'm not an ex-felon, but I don't have a concealed weapon permit, it's my understanding that there's nothing in the statute that allows me to carry a gun, except this instance where you are transporting a gun. For example, going from one county to the next.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: No. We changed that. Now in Texas you can carry a gun all the time in your automobile without a concealed handgun license. REPRESENTATIVE HARROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: That was Terry Keel. I remember it now. And so what we do now is for employers, though, we essentially change the standard of liability for them under this bill from one of ordinary negligence to one of gross negligence.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: As it pertains to employees. John Smith can't come in off the street with a gun in his car and park it in that parking lot. They can still prohibit that. It's an employer and employee deal, as I understand it.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But I assume if he comes over for John Q. Citizen the employee, and he starts shooting at him and then the employee gets his gun out and starts shooting back; where does the liability begin and end there?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: On this bill it begins on those two individuals, unless there's grows gross on the part of the premises owner.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And to use your example, Mr. Chairman, if the nonemployee called the employer and said he was coming on to the premises to get John Q. Employee over here, the employer would have an obligation to do something about that situation or otherwise be exposed under the gross negligence?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: If it was a nonemployee, he would not be covered under this statute. They would still have a duty protect their employees from these nonemployees who may come on.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, were there any other alternatives to this, Mr. Chairman? For example, how about allowing the employer to purchase a liability insurance policy and have the employees who want to carry guns pay for it?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Well, again, we were trying to get a bill that we could pass.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . And I understand that, Mr. Chairman. And in this House I think you've probably crafted one that at least meets that standards.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Thank you, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Than k you, Mr. Chairman.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speake r?

JOE STRAUS: Mrs. Giddings, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes, ma'am, I do.

JOE STRAUS: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Representa tive Kleinschmidt, I notice that you have a list of exemptions or areas or properties that would be excluded.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: And one of those is a property controlled by someone other than the employer that was subject to an oil, gas or mineral lease. representative joe s: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Kleinschmidt. representative joe s: The Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Members, this amendment simply clarifies on the carve out for refineries and petro-chemical areas, that if you -- And again, that's the one that's limited to concealed handgun licensees only, but you have got the right to --

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speake r?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: -- just let me finish this, it's just 30 seconds, and I'll yield. It gives the -- It adds the language that not only can you have the handgun in that situation, but you can also have the ammunition in that situation. That's all this amendment does.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speake r?

JOE STRAUS: Mrs. Giddings, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

JOE STRAUS: Kleinschmidt, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes, I do.

JOE STRAUS: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you, Representative. Directly related to that amendment, the question, we're basically excluding an employee that was subject to an oil, gas or mineral lease executed before a certain date. Can you explain that to me?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes, ma'am. And that exchange actually occurred between the Senators Hagar and Ogden. And what it does is many of the oil and gas leases in the State of Texas have express provisions drafted in them by the landowner of the -- where the location is going to be, you know, where the oil and gas exploration or production or storage is going to be, many of those landowners actually put in the oil and gas leases that they prohibit firearms on their property, you, know to be brought in by the oil company and it's employees. And so the reasoning there is that the oil companies did not want to be in breach of their contract with the oil and gas lease, with those landowners by -- you know, laws now requiring the employees to have firearms on -- the private owners, you know, the landowners premises. So it's an attempt to not put oil and gas companies in a position of breeching the terms of their leases.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Okay. So it has nothing to do with safety in terms of oil and gas being more explosive than anything else?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: So we're giving these people until September the 1st of 2011?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Actually , I have an amendment that's coming on that will take that date out. That date got stuck in here on committee substitute. Senator Hagar's bill coming across. We did the committee substitute on Senator Hagar's Senate Bill, and we had did that they had taken that date limitation out, and we put it back in our committee substitute. I'm just letting you know, just in the interests of letting you know, I've got an amendment that will remove that date to take it back as it was on that date as it came over in the Senate.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Okay. Now the next exemption as to do with the chemical manufacture. I know the chemical counsel, they were opposed to this bill last session; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I didn't carry this bill last session, so I really don't know. But I suppose they probably were.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Uh-huh. And then is this an attempt to shall we say neutralize --

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: They came in early on and requested what we commonly refer to as a carve out for refinery and petro-chemical premises. And we have discussed that. And finally came to a decision is that it was acceptable if they would allow concealed handgun licensees to bring their handguns into their normal parking lot. And the reason you see the rest of the more extensive language there is that many of these companies have a general parking lot that is not secure. And then they allow some of their employees to come within their security fences, and they have more private parking lots located well up inside the plant. And so the reason that is there, in essence, is to keep concealed handgun licensees with their handguns in the general parking lot that's not secured, but not to allow any firearms to go up into the secured portions of the plant.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: One other question. My colleague and I were discussing, you know, safety for children, Boys and Girls Club for instance, a YMCA; is there any exemption for those kinds of facilities where there might be a lot of children?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Well, there's exemptions if those children had an activity in a school district facility, a charter school, a private school or any place that firearms are prohibited by state or federal law. Then, yes, you cannot legally have a firearm around those children in those circumstances.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: I don't think any of the YMCA, I don't think the YMCA, the YWCA, the Boys and Girls Clubs, anything like that, I don't think they would be excluded in any of the exemptions that you mentioned.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No, their facilities weren't. What I was speaking to was if they had a corporative program going with one of those facilities well, then they are covered.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: How would you feel about an amendment excluding places like the YMCA --

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: That would go beyond the scope of this bill, Representative. This is a parking lot, employer, employee bill. And that's what I would like to keep it to. It wouldn't be possible to get bill this far if it were that far reaching and extensive. And so we're not dealing with public places where people come, and the public pulls up and parks, anything of that nature. This is an employer owned parking lot, and it involves their employees only.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Well, a YMCA, a YWCA, would they have employees?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: It would apply to a YMCA employee.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: So the YMCA or the YWCA, their employees could bring their concealed weapons on to the YMCA or YWCA property?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: As long as they don't fall under the general prohibition of being in a place where it is prohibited under state or federal law, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: How about hospitals? Hospitals also the have employees, children's hospitals.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: What was the answer, sir? Are they exempt?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: They are not carved out or exempted in this bill.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: That is something that concerns me a little bit. Does it concern you? Because people do get angry with one another every now and then, and if we thought there was no risk involved, no safety risk involved, we probably wouldn't be carrying this bill so that people could have, for lack of a better term, protection.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: People's safety always concerns me very much. But you got understand, I understand from a practical standpoint that there are already firearms in the parking lots of our hospitals, our YMCAs in Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Kleinschmidt, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Mr. Kleinsch midt, now I have -- just like Mr. Deshotel, I have lots of plants, chemical plants and refineries in my district. And my NRA constituents certainly want this bill, and I plan on supporting it. But I do have a question; the people that work at the refineries and chemical plants, if there's let's say 3,000 people that work at BP, there may be 400 or 500 who are actually employees, and another 2000 that are contractors.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I understand.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Now, under this bill, the employees, the actual employees of the owner of the facility will be able to bring their gun, in their car, onto the parking lot premises. However, is it my reading that the contract employees, or the contractors who are not employees of the facility, would be ineligible to bring their guns?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I believe you are stating that correctly. If the contractors are not employees of the company this bill does not affect them.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Okay. And so what do I tell all of my constituents that go to the plants who want me to support this bill, that are not covered by this bill?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Now I understand their plight, and the bill is simply not extensive enough. This is intended to be limited to an employer/employee deal, and it's simply not going to be extensive enough to cover every person.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Anyone wishing to speak for or against the amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Move passage of my amendment. And I have one other amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Representative Kleinschmidt sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Kleinschmidt.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Members, as I've discuss with the representatives earlier, this amendment on the -- what I call oil and gas lease carve out, where employees of oil and gas companies can't bring their firearms on private property; it takes out that date of execution of September 1st, 2011, and leaves the date open. That's how the bill came over from the Senate. And when we did the Committee Substitute they put that date back, and in order to quorum with what we got I'm -- this amendment would strike that date and leave it open. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Kleinschmidt sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Eiland, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Kleinschmidt, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Can you explain this to me, this amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: The last amendment under oil and gas lease situation, not the petro-chemical.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Right. So I own a ranch in south Texas and I lease to -- for them to drill a well, and they have a pad site on my ranch, on the Caliche, right?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Now what happens?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: You're their employer oil company, and let's assume that the lease that your oil company negotiated with the landowner had expressly had a provision in it where the landowners prohibit the oil companies' employees from bringing firearms on that farm or ranch. Well then this is not going allow those employees to bring that firearm on that ranch. It will honor the terms of negotiated oil and gas lease between the employer and the landowner.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Okay. I'm a rancher, I've got deer, exotic game, whatever; and I say look, I don't want you your oil field hands coming out here shooting my deer, so nobody can bring a gun on to my ranch, even if you're drilling an oil well.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: If it expressly states that in the terms of the lease, that's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Okay.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes.

JOE STRAUS: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Than k you, Mr. Kleinschmidt. Tell me again, the amendment that you are asking us to put on this bill does what?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I'm sorry, I didn't hear that.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: The amendment does exactly what? It carves out an exemption for the oil and gas industry?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: No, that already existed. But it was defining the leases that would be affected by a date of September the 1st, 2011, as the leases would be dated in the negotiation or the execution between the landowner and the oil company that was put with the lessee. And, inadvertently, when we drafted committee substitute, we took out -- we left that in when that had been negotiated out by Senators Hagar and Ogden in the past. So we simply took the date out so it leaves the date open, so it continues to affect future oil and gas leases rather than being limited by ones executed before September 1st of 2011.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: So effectively, what the amendment does is allow some landowner to carve out on exemption as to whether or not they will permit an employee to come onto their property with a gun?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And can you give me the public policy reason for doing that?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: It's simply to honor the contractual rights that exist between the oil company lessee and the landowner/lessor.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, that seems to be like a third party contract, and we're not honoring the other contract, the primary contract.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Well, in one place you've got a contract right from the employers' standpoint, and you've got a property right. And, I agree with you, we do deal in restrictions on property in the State of Texas. This may be one more.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . You know, I'm not sure that the exception is necessary, because I don't understand why we need to make an exception for -- in that instance. But, in all other instances, we completely initiate the contract and ignore it and go on to allow everybody to carry a gun on to the premises; into the parking lot at least.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: You're simply saying that you want it to stay as it is, is that what you're saying? I don't understand your question.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: If we start carving out those exceptions I can think of literally hundreds of more of exception that are, in my opinion, would tend to eat up the rule. And I guess, as my colleague just said, I guess we're just crafting a bill that will get passed. This has nothing to do with anything else except whether or not it will get passed. And so I guess that means that it speaks more about us than it does about the issue that we're trying to attempt --

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: It's about balance between employees and employers, is what it is.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, I still -- I still don't understand why we go beyond concealed weapons. But that's another argument. Thank you Mr. Kleinschmidt.

REPRESENTATIVE BORRIS MILES: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Miles, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE BORRIS MILES: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

JOE STRAUS: Kleinschmidt, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE BORRIS MILES: Representati ve Kleinschmidt, I just have a question. As an owner of strip centers, explain to me what the extent of my liability is under your bill. I'm the owner of strip centers. Explain to me the extent of my liability under your bill.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: If you're the owner of a strip center then if this bill -- if you're not an employer, if you don't have your employees parking in that strip center --

REPRESENTATIVE BORRIS MILES: My employees for my business also park in that parking lot.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Well, if you're an employer, to the extent that you have employees parking in that parking lot, that bill will allow them bring to their legal firearms on to your parking lot.

REPRESENTATIVE BORRIS MILES: But what is the extent of my liability as the owner of the strip center, that's all I'm concerned with?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: To the extent -- Under my bill it would be your liability.

REPRESENTATIVE BORRIS MILES: I'm sorry, I can't hear you.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Your liability would be limited to gross negligence.

REPRESENTATIVE BORRIS MILES: As the owner of the strip center, under your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE BORRIS MILES: So I'm gross negligence, under your bill? Do you hear that, Representative Vo? Did you hear that? You're gross negligence under this bill.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against the amendment? Chair recognizes Representative Veasey in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Members, I am speaking against the amendment, because I think this is supposed to be about a bill about gun owners and gun rights, and it seems that the very people that are sportsmen, that are fishermen, the people that carry their guns, they're the people that work out in these particular facilities. And so I think that if we pass a bill that excludes them that, you know, it's not probably not going to be a good thing. There's a poplar reality TV show called black gold that sort of depicts the every day life of people that work in this field. Sometimes they get a little rowdy and they get a little rambunctious, and I see how people wouldn't want them to have guns. But I think if we should be exempting people we should be looking at facilities that deal specifically with children and young people, and not sportsmen. So I'm going to vote against this particular amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt to close.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Passage of the amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Kleinschmidt sends up an amendment. The question is on the adoption of the Kleinschmidt amendment. Showing Representative Kleinschmidt voting aye. Showing Representative Driver voting aye. Showing Representative Taylor voting aye. Representative Hunter voting aye. Representative Taylor voting aye. Van Taylor. Representative Lewis voting aye. Showing Representative Laubenberg voting aye. Have all voted? Showing Representative Gonzalez voting aye. Have all voted? There being 110 ayes, 27 nays; the amendment is adopted. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Veasey.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I was happy to support the sportsmen that work out in fields in that previous amendment, and also wanted to stick up for the children and the young people that work at private recreational facilities and private facilities that provide child care services. Representative Giddings pointed out earlier that she was concerned about facilities that are not covered under the education code, that are currently in the bill, that may not fall under Mr. Kleinschmidt's bill. Like, for instance, I can tell you in Fort Worth that we have a place called Rockies Recreational Association. Lots of children, lots of young people there, lots of basketball games, volleyball games, there are all sorts of different sporting events that go on at this particular recreational facility. And it would make it to where those sorts of places that cater to lots of young people would be exempt. Also, when I was a kid, there used to be a pool that was called the Ridgely Pool Association or something like that, and it was a place -- it was private pool, it was not a city pool. You had to actually pay money to swim at this particular facility. And I don't think that people like lifeguards, or other people that work at those types of facilities that are not covered under this bill, that that would not be the proper place to take a gun.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speake r?

JOE STRAUS: Mrs. Giddings, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

JOE STRAUS: Veasey, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Veasey , I appreciate your amendment. I believe that the safety, the health and safety of our children ought to be of the highest priority. Do you agree with that?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: A hundred percent.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: And obviously, if one is going to be taking a weapon, or is in possession of a weapon on a parking lot, one must feel that there is at least some danger; would you agree with that?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: And if there is some danger, then there is some possibility that the gun could be drawn and fired?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Yes. And at these sorts of facilities you would not want that to happen.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: You would not want that to happen, because the children could be at real risk. I think you have a great amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Thank you very much. And, members, there are La Petite Academies, private facilities that would not be covered under this code. And there's just absolutely no reason why those folks should bring a handgun on to a facility if the owner of that facility does not want them to bring one. And there is even some child care facilities to where there may just have one or two employees, it may be a much more intimate or personal setting, and that just would not be the place to have a gun. And the same thing with these private pools and places like that that specifically cater to young people. And you have young people working there. I mean who thinks that that 21-year-old lifeguard should be able the bring a gun on to a pool facility? So, with that, I move passage, unless Representative Kleinschmidt is going to --

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt to close.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Members, I'm going to move to table this proposed amendment. It actually would be contrary to existing law in the State of Texas. Members, we all understand that currently concealed handgun licenses permit these -- already have the right to weapons in the parking lot and even on the sidewalks of our school systems all across the State of Texas. And, again, this would be just a further restriction on Second Amendment rights in the State of Texas. I move to table.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Veasey to close on his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I actually think this is less of a restriction than was on the previous amendment that was passed, that would not allow adults to take their guns on to facilities where they go and work every day. Like very grown adults, mainly men that work out of these facilities. Sportsmen that would not be allowed to take their guns. And I think that a 21 year old lifeguard, and all of these other folks that have these concealed handgun licenses that work around kids, I think this is actually a better amendment than the previous one that was passed, and I think it's more in line with what the bill is trying to accomplish. Please vote no on the motion to table.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Veasey sends up an amendment. Representative Kleinschmidt moves to table. This is on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote nay. Showing Representative Kleinschmidt voting aye. Representative Veasey voting no. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 100 ayes, 41 nays; the motion to table prevails. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Lewis.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Lewis.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker and members, this is a fairly long amendment so I would like to go over it with you. What I would like to do is go through the amendment to let you know what it does, the structure of it, why I have brought it and then, of course, I would be more than pleased to answer the Chairman's questions; or anyone else who has questions about it. The bill that we have before us has an immunity provision in it, an immunity from civil liability for employers. What this amendment does is to replace that in its entirety. The first section of this that you see before you, if you are looking on your screens, has very similar language to the civil immunity portion section of the bill. In addition to that, though, it has several differences. First of all, the bill that is before you has a total exception for gross negligence. That's replaced in this amendment by the phrase except provided -- otherwise provided in Article 16, Section 26. That's the gross negligence provision. But it deals with basically wrongful death. So the amendment that I have limits the gross negligence liability. Secondly, it spells out exactly who we're talking about. The bill that is filed only has the employer and its agent, and agent can have many meanings. It can have a very strict defined meaning, which wouldn't do much good if you're going to give immunity. If you're going to give immunity you need to have it for the principals, the officers, the directors and the other employees, the employees there, to have immunity to do you any good. One thing that I questioned Representative Kleinschmidt about was is he trying to make liability or immunity for the employer, only if the subchapter was complied with about locking the vehicle and so forth? He said no, it shouldn't be on the employer to make sure the vehicle is locked. However, the bill, as filed, requires that the immunity is there only if it is stored and transported in accordance with 52061, which requires it to be locked. So I think that it does not give very much immunity to a employer. So I have changed that to have that the immunity is there so long as the vehicle -- the firearm is transported on, or is stored under a right provide by the subchapter. Now of more importance the the language with regard to the lack of duty. I asked Representative Kleinschmidt is it your intention that employers should have a duty to patrol or inspect the premises or secure the vehicles, make sure they're locked; or confirm or investigate or determine whether an employee is in compliance with law when they're transporting a weapon? And he said no, not that's not my intent. We don't want that employer to have that liability. But there's nothing at all, nothing at all in the bill that says that. And, for that reason, this amendment specifies particularly that the employer has no duty under this act, no duty to patrol, inspect or secure the parking lot, or any part of the premises, or to investigate or confirm whether or not an employee is complying with the law. The third part of and it, this is just my presentation and I'd be happy to take questions, the third part of it is there is nothing in the bill that says that the employee or, pardon me, the person who actually causes the harm is not under that immunity. In other words, if it's an employee or if someone else employed an officer who causes the harm, are they immune under the bill? It's not clear to me. So what I've got in here is a specific provision that this immunity does not alter the liability of any individual who causes harm or injury by using or exhibiting a firearm or ammunition, or anyone who aids, assists or encourages another to do so; and it does not cover an employee who transports or stores a firearm, but fails to comply with the requirements. They either -- may be they're not eligible to have a firearm, or they don't lock the vehicle. So they're not covered. Let me mention one thing about gross liability, because that's the biggest difference here in the first part of this provision with this in the bill. Typically, I would never bring a bill that does away with gross negligence liability. So, typically, I would not do this. The reason for this in this particular case is, you know, it's not like employers are coming up here clamoring to have this bill, clamoring to be forced to allow firearms to be placed on their premise and not have any control or any say in it. That's what we're doing. We are requiring compliance. And, to me, if we're requiring it, we're mandating it, the employer shouldn't have any liability for firearms that are brought onto their premise; because we're making them do it. Even gross negligence implies there's a duty. And, to me, the employer should not have any duty because that firearm is on their premises, and then it's misused. So that's why I did it. The second part of that is, we can say all day well, we're only limiting it to gross negligence liability. But the fact is, if it's just negligence standards and something bad happens, there's a tragedy, the employer is going to get sued. If it's gross negligence standards and something bad happens, there's a tragedy, the employer is going to get sued. That's why the immunity, to me, has to be complete. And of the states I know, the ones that I was able to look at that have these kind of statutes, that is say Florida --

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Woul d the gentleman yield for a question?

JOE STRAUS: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I'm almost through, Chairman. Florida, Mississippi, Georgia, Alaska and Louisiana. I think that all of these states do not carve out exceptions for gross negligence, and I think that's the reason. And I do yield. Sorry for being long-winded, Mr. Chairman.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, the gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Than k you, Mr. Speaker. Let me ask you, can you tell me under which situation an employer could be held liable under your amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: If -- If the firearm is brought onto the premises pursuant to and under a right to do so in this subsection. In other words, its transported on to be left in the parking lot, and then something later happens with that firearm, the employer would not be liable.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Unde r any circumstances?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Under any circumstances, except for the wrongful death exception gross negligence, wrongful death.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Expl ain to me how an employer could be held liable under that standard then that you just described, under the wrongful death standard and gross negligence. Tell me what would happen. Give me a scenario of how that would happen.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: If an employer were grossly negligent -- It's hard to think of a factual situation but I mean they could be out there. If an employer knew of the propensity of someone and -- to be a violent person, and didn't take action, I guess, to secure them. I will say a good example, I guess, if an employer had a security guard available and someone went out to get a weapon out of the parking lot, and that person comes and security didn't do the job adequately, they were grossly negligent; then the employer, even under this bill, could still be sued if death were caused.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But only if a death were caused?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But serious bodily injury, an employee under your amendment, though, would be completely absolved of any liability; right?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's right. So -- As long as the reason the weapon is there is a right under this subchapter. So we're making the employer do it.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: You say we're making the employer do what?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Allow weapons to be on their premise.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And the way you understand it, though, is because you perceive that we're making them do that, you think that that means we ought to limit or at lease eliminate any liability that they may have for incidents that occur while on their property?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Yes. That is right. If the reason the weapon is there and available is because we have mandated that right, then the employer should not be liable because that weapon was available and then used.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, you realize that that conflicts with what Mr. Kleinschmidt told me a moment ago, right? Mr. Kleinschmidt said they're already bringing them on to premises of the parking lot.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Pardon me?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Kleinschmidt said that employees were already bringing the weapons on to the parking lot. That's what he just told me.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: This bill requires them to do that, requires the employer to allow that to happen.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I understand. But I'm challenging your premise that you made that we are making them bring the employees -- the employer, rather, let these employees bring the weapons on to the premises. That's not what we're doing at all, according to Mr. Kleinschmidt. Mr. Kleinschmidt said they are already there, and so we're not doing that.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: At this time, employers have every right, just as you do and I do, with control of our premises, to say no one can bring weapons on, no employee can bring weapons on their premises. They have that right. We are now, by this, of course, we're taking away that option.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Let me ask this: Would an employee would be within their rights to make, as a condition of employment, that they don't bring their weapon on to the premises?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I think that would violate the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Did you -- I didn't see a provision in there, but you think that would violate the bill?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I think that would violate the bill, because the bill gives employees a right to bring firearms on to the premises, as long as they leave them in the parking lot.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Yeah , but the employers -- So the way you view this, an employer could not even condition your right to employment by excluding you from employment if you chose to exercise your right under this bill?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I think that would be my interpretation of this bill, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: That is -- That is --

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Because it says that an employer can't prohibit an employee from doing these things.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But you're not an employee yet until you're hired. What I'm asking about is preemployment, and the question I'm asking is whether or not, prior to employment, an employer can require you, as a condition of hiring you, not to bring your weapon on to the parking lot?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: You know, Chairman, that would probably be a question better asked to the bills author. I'm just saying as I read it, I would think that I -- you would be you would be in violation. But that would something the author should respond to.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: My question has to do with are you going to have a situation where at a particular employers' address, you'll have some employers or employees for which the employer liability would be based on a gross negligence standard; other employees, the standard would be less than gross negligence, or no negligence at all, or no liability whatsoever? Because it seems to me that your amendment says that if someone is killed, that's the only point in time where the employer can be held liable at all, under this bill; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But that's only in the instance where --

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's a constitutional provision.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: That 's only in the instance where someone comes on to premise and has a CHL and (inaudible).

JOE STRAUS: Representative Burkett moves that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken an sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I couldn't hear the question.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I couldn't hear what the speaker said, either.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Representati ve Burkett moves that time has expired. The motion is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . Well, y'all need to speak English.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Mr. Spe aker?

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Has the time been extended already on this amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: No one has requested a prior extension on this amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: I would ask that the time be extended.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Members, you heard the request. Is there objection? There's no objection. Time is extended. Representative Gonzalez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, for a few questions.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I happily yield to Madam Chairman.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you, Representative Lewis. I will tell you that at first look when I saw your amendment I thought it was good that the State is going to force employers to have -- to allow guns on their premises then there shouldn't be liability. But as I look further at your amendment -- I want to give you some scenarios and see if you can tell me would your amendment preclude any kind liability? Let's say, for instance, that you have an employee who has been demoted, or an employee that has had a problem with another employee, and you know it; and the employee has told you that he's very angry and there is a possibility that this employee is going to do something to this other employee, and you don't do anything about it, say you don't do anything about it and now you've got an employee that comes in there and shoots another employee, he become as quadriplegic. Under your amendment there would be no liability to that employer; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: No, that's actually not correct. Under the scenario you've given, if Here's more facts it may be, but under the scenario you've given it there is not. There is nothing about this bill, or either, incidentally, the liability overall is -- issues the same in the bill and in the amendment, to some extent, to your question. But there's nothing in either the bill, as I understand the bill, or my amendment that would stop a suit against an employer where someone goes out, gets a gun, storms back to the place of business and starts shooting people.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: I'm not asking that. I'm saying he's got a gun in his car.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: The only time it really -- the liability it limits is where someone brings a gun to the premises and leaves it in their car, and then something happens. Then maybe someone gets mad, they run out, get a gun, they come in and start shooting. The reason they had access to the gun is because we mandated that they can, that they can have it in the parking lot. It would preclude liability of an employer in that situation, even if the person was severely injured; yes, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Okay. So, for instance, you know there's been thefts of guns in your parking lot and you know that and you, the employer, don't do anything about it, and somebody breaks into a car, gets a gun and goes inside and starts shooting and hurts someone and actually they become a quadraplegic; under your bill the employer would have no liability?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Okay. Let's say that we're -- We talked earlier about the fact that the bill was not limited, it would not exclude Boys and Girls Clubs, it would not exclude a hospital, a Children's Hospital. So if, for instance, that happens and a child is hurt and a child is left paralyzed, there would be no type of liability to the employer; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's exactly correct.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: And, in fact, let's say that a child is killed. Under your amendment, because of the way the constitution is written, only a spouse and the children can recover damages, but the parents would not be able to recover damages; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: If it's a fact situation covered by the bill, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Okay. So that's correct, though, the parents would not be able --

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: If it's a firearm brought to the place of work, left in the car, that's right; the employer is not liable under any circumstances, except for the constitutional amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Nor could the parent of that child recover if a child is killed?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: It's spouses and heirs.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: It's spouses and heirs, and that means it goes down but not up; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's right.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Okay. So we are very much limiting what the current law is by virtue of your amendment, are we not?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's right. In these very limited situations the employer would not be liable except in certain very limited situations.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Well very limited. But we don't know what the scenarios may be out there, we don't know the types of places where this could occur. I imagine that if this bill passes it's going to become very well known. I mean, we're already telling employers on your property you can't control whether a gun is brought and left in a car or not. And now we're saying if you get hurt and become a quadriplegic, a paraplegic, if you are -- you are required, you know, to the house for life, you can't go after that person even if they knew -- even if they new or should have known, even if they knew that this was going happen; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: No, you can't say that they knew, because if they knew then we specifically take out that it does alter the liability of someone who aids, assists or encourages another. And I think in the situation where you know they're going to do it, and so in a sense (inaudible) they didn't do anything to stop it. I think you would have liability in that.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: You would have to make the argument because if you knew it, it equated to assistance. But you should have known because, for instance, as we talked about, you knew there was theft of these guns in your parking lot. This happens all the time in nightclubs, it happens at restaurants, and yet it could happen where you know that there's theft of these guns and yet you've done nothing about it and then an injury occurs. And now you, the employer, under your amendment, under your scenario, would have no liability; correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That is correct. As long as it is a situation under this subchapter, an employee bringing a gun to work, as we have allowed, and leaving it in the parking lot, the employer would not have liability; because it's not their option to allow it or to not allow it, they have to allow it. And we are making that happen so --

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: And under just a pure, plain negligence standard I would agree with you. But when there's gross negligence and the employer has some knowledge, or should have known by virtue of the circumstances, I don't agree with that. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I think otherwise they just get sued. I mean that's what I've seen. I've seen it in Workers' Compensation situations.

REPRESENTATIVE ERWIN CAIN: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Representati ve Cain, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ERWIN CAIN: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Representati ve, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Of course I do, be happy to.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE ERWIN CAIN: We've been talking a lot about the different community aspects of this. Just to make it clear, does your amendment provide any immunity to the malfeasant, the bad actor?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: No. In fact, unlike the original bill, there are specific provisions in the amendment that someone that uses or exhibits as gun, who causes harm, and anyone who helps them, they are still liable; and those are not carved out in the original bill.

REPRESENTATIVE ERWIN CAIN: So, to make it clear, this bill and this amendment does not provide any immunity to the bad actor?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That is exactly right. In fact, it makes it clear that they don't have immunity, which is not the case under the bill as filed.

REPRESENTATIVE ERWIN CAIN: You also expressed some earlier concerns about whether the original language in the bill covers all variations of the employer. And I noted in your amendment that you include such variations as the employers' principal officer, director, employee or agent. Do those terms sufficiently address your concerns about the variations of the employer?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Yeah. There are several definitions of agents, and if the courts use the most strict meaning, which is usually the construction rule that deals with immunity; then an agent could be just someone tasked with a particular mission for -- for a principal to deal with a third party. What we want this to be and what it should be, is that it includes everybody in that business. Otherwise, you don't have to sue the employer, you can sue an officer, you can see a co-employee and you get the same advantages as if you just sued the employer by name.

REPRESENTATIVE ERWIN CAIN: Thank you. Good amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Thank you very much.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Representati ve Huberty, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Yes, I do.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: We had little discussion earlier, and I just want to get some clarification, because we're talking about employers with parking lots. But there's a lot of people that own buildings that have parking lots on them where they have multi tenants that go into those buildings and work for the lessee of the property from the lessor is in that building and they are going to allow their employees to have guns. If an employee comes out, gets a gun and creates a shooting, or something happens, does this allow the building owner, like myself; and people in this room, that maybe own multi-tenant buildings, to also have immunity?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: What this does, it is immunity for the employer. If an employer has an employee who brings a firearm and has it in the parking lot, has access to it and then -- and then someone gets -- either the employee or someone else gets that weapon and then goes and commits a crime, the employer and the people in that employment relationship, officers and directors and so forth, they would be immune from suit. They could not be sued.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: So the premises owner could still have ultimate liability under this scenario, then?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Representati ve Farrar moves that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Representative Lewis sends up an amendment. Is there anyone that wishes to speak on, for, or against the amendment? Chair shows Representative Eiland to speak against.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Mr. Speaker, members, I know that Chairman Deshotel is going to speak against anything Mr. Kleinschmidt is going to move to table. But I want to make sure everybody understands exactly what this amendment does. And in a situation I had with Mr. Zedler brings this to mind, that we all need know exactly what it does. First of all, the bill, the people in my district; I have approximately eight to ten percent of the refining capacity in the United States in my district, so I have lots of chemical plants, lots of refineries, lots of employees, lot of contractors. This bill, as it came out of committee, does not allow contractors to bring their guns on to the refinery or the chemical plant premises. So know that, number one. This is only for direct employees. The vast majority of the people that work the plants in my district, and my NRA members, most of them are contractors, not employees. I want to make sure that everybody knows when they go home and do their little mail-outs and speeches that this does not bestow anything new on contractors. They will still be prevented from bringing their guns in the car on the plant premises. That's number one. So it's bad enough for the contractors already, okay. Under the bill as it is, if the premises' owner is grossly negligent, the contractor and the employee have the same rights under Mr. Kleinschmidts' bill. If the premises' owner is negligent, neither one of them have any rights. If the premises' owner is grossly negligent, the employee, the contractor, the citizen all have the same rights. Mr. Lewis' amendment takes all those rights away from everybody, except employees, because those rights are protected in the constitution and he would have to amend the constitution to take those rights away. So your contractors are not covered under the bill, and then they're treated terribly by not given same rights if the employer is grossly negligent. So if this amendment goes on, as much as I wanted to vote for it, because the majority of my NRA members, this does absolutely no good because none of them; in all of my correspondence, none of them said let me take my gun to work and give my employer immunity if they are grossly negligent and I get injured or killed.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Representati ve Menendez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Will the gentleman yield for a quick question?

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Craig, you just said something that was very important that I think people really need to understand. The Constitution says that is if they're grossly negligent, that only applies if someone is killed, is that not correct?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Only if they are killed, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: So if a shooting occurs, a tragedy event occurs, and three people are injured, one is killed, so the family of the one who is killed has a right to sue; but the people that are wounded and may be paralyzed, they have no rights; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Correct. You have to be killed in order to have a right.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: If the amendment goes on?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: If the amendment goes on.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: So, members, make sure that you know, because this amendment is not good, it doesn't change the rights of employees; it does change the right of contractors and normal citizens that are on the premises.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt to speak against.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Members, that last exchange was very important. And I want you to understand there are several things, one of the big problems with this amendment is that it's too complex. It's going to create too complex a structure to deal with from a liability standpoint. Two, the bill is drafted to strike a balance as far as responsibilities go, as far as liabilities go, and rights go between employees and employers. This amendment skews that balance very far to the employers' side. Three, so that you understand that example given more clearly, you can have, under Mr. Lewis' amendment, you can have two employees going to the parking lot and you could have the employer grossly negligent due to it being dark and dangerous and unguarded and uninsured, et cetera. And, just as Representative Eiland said, the employee that dies in whatever confrontation that occurs would be covered under the current law, under the Workers' Compensation Death Act. The employee that simply gets injured has no action against their employer for a grossly negligent situation. So this amendment can create a very unjust and inequitable situation between the various employees that could be covered. And I --

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Mr. Speak er?

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Will gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Mr. Klein schmidt, as I understand what you just said, essentially the Lewis amendment would create separate classes of victims, separate classes of people? Is that accurate?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: That's correct. Those that die and had those that are injured.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: So in terms of the quadriplegic, or someone who suffers a very tragic injury, that would be treated totally and entirely different from someone who is killed?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: The way I understand it, if you're injured, you do not recover for gross negligence under Representative Lewis' amendment. If you die, you possibly can recover for gross negligence.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: So you can have essentially two employees and each is going to be treated differently, even if they were co-workers sitting next to each other at the time, one can be treated one way and the other can be a --

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: They did the same thing, they were in the same place, they were there the same time. The one that dies can recover under gross negligence, the one that's injured cannot.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: And so that means not only the employee, but that also implies to the employees' family, the widow, the spouse --

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: The heirs, the kids.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Again, you're creating separate classes, if you will. Separate classification of people who are winners and losers. Even if they're in the the same situation, you and I are in the same boat, we are in the same situation; but there's going be winners and losers under this amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Chair recognizes Representative Deshotel to speak against.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Members, I know you're tired of hearing the pros and cons of gross negligence, or any negligence at all. The reason I'm talking against this amendment has more to do with the process of the House, and it's not in my bill, but I am quite concerned. This bill said in committee, and we were about the vote this bill out, several people came and testified against bill; those who you see a letter going around, mostly oil and gas and heavy industry, testified against the bill. So what I decided to do is to hold the bill in committee, get everybody to come to get to craft a bill that everybody could be happy with. We did that. It was my understanding that everybody got something of what they wanted and we had an agreed to bill. I think that's an important process for committee and the chairman to know how important that process is, to get our legislation out and to get legislation passed. It wasn't until this bill hit the calendar all of a sudden there was all these problems, and there was Mr. Lewis' amendment. Now, I want to be clear, Mr. Lewis was not involved in this negotiation. He had nothing to do with the deal and he has the right to bring his amendment. But the industry, the businesses that are asking you and calling you and asking you to vote for that amendment know that we bent over backwards to get everybody together to carve out industry, carved out oil and gas, carved them out of the bill; because they were very concerned. So I held the bill to let them get them that moving liability, and only leaving gross negligence in the bill. Everybody gave some. And we had this agreed to bill. And now, at the 11th hour, we're throwing all these red herrings in this bill and trying to put this amendment and turn it into some sort of tort reform bill of some sort. I'm asking you, members, to help me stand with the integrity of the the process, because it's important. First thing I learned when I got here seven sessions ago, that your word is what's going to carry you through this legislative process. And once you lose that, and once people begin to say he told me yes, but he voted no, then you're going to have a very hard time in this legislature. It's very important, once you give your word, to stand by and it to keep it. And that's why I'm asking to you keep this amendment off this bill, because it was an agreed to bill. And, yes, I am taking a little personal. I mean, for instance, as an aside, I got a root canal this morning, I don't want an colonoscopy tonight. Thank y'all. And I move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Represe ntative Deshotel to table. Representative Lewis to close on the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In spite of everything said here, the fact is -- and the reason that the language is as it is because we are requiring that employers allow employees to bring weapons to the parking lot. And if there is -- If I could finish these remarks I'll yield to you. Obviously, if we are going to -- if there is a situation where a gun is accessible because of what we have done, the employer is not making this happen; we are. And the employer should not be sued. And people talked about gross negligence, but what I have seen is if you say the employer can only be liable for gross negligence, it doesn't mean they're not going to be sued. They get sued just the same. Anytime there's a tragedy they're going to be sued. And if the root of that tragedy that there was a gun in the parking lot, which is all this is about; and these people had access to it, it shouldn't be the employer having to face that lawsuit. They didn't make this happen. We did. And that's why, in this very limited circumstance, I don't think employers ought to have liability. I think that that's something that they are required to do. As long as they are doing what we require them to do, it's not their duty to these people to stop these things from happening. Also, I might mention, there is nothing in this bill, in the immunity language that's in the bill, that says the person who does the shooting, or uses the weapon or exhibits the weapon is not immune, too. If they are the employers' agent it could be argued that they are immune. We need to have it where the employer has no duty to inspect the parking lot, to make sure the cars are locked, to make sure the person is legally authorized to carry the weapon. We need to make sure that the persons who do the harm are not immune from this. And, with that, those are the reasons I have --

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA HOWARD: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Mrs. Ho ward, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA HOWARD: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I do yield, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA HOWARD: Thank you, judge. I the think you know I'm not a lawyer, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I do know that. But you did stay in a Hotel Express last night, or something. Holiday Express.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA HOWARD: Any way, so I'm trying to figure this out and understand what's going on, since I'm not a lawyer; which makes it a little more difficult, I think, for some of us who are nonlawyers to sift through all of this. But if I understand correctly, you're offering this amendment simply because there is a bill that we're proposing that is taking away the -- essentially the ability of an employer to determine what happens on that employer's property.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I'm offering this amendment on immunity because I'm saying that employers shouldn't be liable and be sued if they're just complying with what we're making them do.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA HOWARD: So we're, through this bill, making them do something. And because it's something that they really weren't -- they may not want to do, but we are making them do it, we should therefore make sure that there is no liability whatsoever here; which seems like an extreme thing, from a nonlawyer, for something that -- the assumption being that we're taking away the employers' ability to control what happens on their property in the first place. Like that's really the issue, that we're taking the employers' ability to make their own decisions about who -- what happens on the property that they own, what the employees can bring on that property. That's really the issue, it seems to me. Am I missing something there?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's the threshold issue. There's a meshing here of rights, of Second Amendment rights and of employers' property rights; and we're deciding where that should go. And I'm just saying if we decide, and if this body decides that we're going make employers to allow these weapons to be on their premises, then the employers shouldn't have additional duties and should be -- in the line of getting sued for not taking these duties. I mean it shouldn't be the employer that bears the brunt of that.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA HOWARD: So if I'm hearing you correctly then, it seems like if I were, as a nonlawyer, looking at this; my choice would be to say we shouldn't put the employers in this position in the first place, could be one of the choice I might make?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: There are two choices and that's one of them. There's a yes or no on the bill, and there's a yes or no on this amendment -- on the the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA HOWARD: And if I chose to have employers be mandated to do this, then your suggestion would be we should at least free them from any liability?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's correct, Representative.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA HOWARD: I'm think I'm going to go with the first choice. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Thank you. And I request that you vote against the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Represe ntative Lewis sends up an amendment. Representative Deshotel moves to table. The question is on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote nay. Please vote from your desk. Clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Deshotel voting aye. Showing Representative Hardcastle voting aye. Have all members voted? Showing Representative Fletcher voting aye. Showing Representative Deshotel voting aye. Showing Representative Kleinschmidt voting aye. Have all members voted? You got plenty of time to vote, members. Have all members voted?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Members , the vote is 70 ayes, 70 nays. There being insufficient majority, the motion to table fails.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Verifica tion vote, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: There is a verification vote request. Members, please take your seats. Verification is granted. Members, take your seats for the verification vote, please. The clerk will proceed to verify the nay votes first. Members, please take your seats for the vote. Members, please take your seats. Clerk will proceed with the nay votes first.

CLERK: Aliseda, Allen, Beck, Bohac, Branch, Burkett, Button, Cain, Carter, Chisum, Christian, Craddick.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Is Representative Craddick on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily.

CLERK: Creighton, Crownover, Darby, Sarah Davis of Harris, Elkins, Flynn, Frullo, Garza, Geren, Gooden, Guillen, Hancock, Harless, Isaac, Jackson, Keffer, King of Parker, Kolkhorst, Kuempel, Landtroop, Larson, Laubenberg, Lavender, Legler, Lewis, Lyne, Margo, Miles, Miller of Comal, Morrison, Murphy, Nash, Orr, Otto, Parker, Paxton, Pena, Perry, Phillips, Price, Ritter, Schwertner, Scott, Sheets, Sheffield, Shelton, Simpson, Smith of Tarrant, Solomons, Taylor of Galveston, Taylor of Collin, Torres, Truitt -- Truitt?

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Is Representative Truitt on the floor of the House? Strike her name temporarily.

CLERK: Vo, White, Woolley, Workman, Zedler.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: The clerk will now proceed to verify the aye votes.

CLERK: Alonzo, Alvarado, Anchia, Anderson of McClendon, Berman, Brown, Burnam, Callegari, Castro, Coleman, Cook, Davis -- John Davis of Harris, Davis of Dallas, Deshotel, Driver, Dukes, Dutton, Eiland, Eissler, Farias, Farrar, Fletcher, Gallego, Giddings, Gonzales of Hidalgo, Gonzalez of El Paso, Gutierrez, Hamilton, Hardcastle, Hartnett, Hildebrand, Hochberg, Howard of Fort Bend, Howard of Travis, Huberty, Hughes -- Hughes.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Is Representative Hughes on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily.

CLERK: Hunter, Johnson, King of Taylor, King of Zavala, Kleinschmidt, Lozano, Lucio, Madden, Mallory Caraway, Marquez, Martinez, Martinez Fischer, Menendez, Miller of Erath, Munoz, Naishtat, Oliveira, Patrick, Pickett, Quintanilla, Raymond, Reynolds, Riddle, Rodriguez, Smith of Harris, Rodriguez.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Is Mr. Rodriguez on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily.

CLERK: Smith of Harris, Smithee, Strama, Thompson, Turner, Veasey, Villarreal -- Villareal.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Is Mr. Villarreal on the floor of the House? There he is. He just changed chairs. He's here.

CLERK: Walle, Weber, Zerwas.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Is Mr. Craddick on the floor of the House? Strike his name. Is Mr. Hughes on the floor of the House? Strike his name. Is Representative Rodriguez on the floor of the House? Strike his name. Is Representative Truitt on the floor of the House? Strike her name. The following members were present voting aye, but their machines malfunctioned. Show them voting aye: Allen, Hernandez Luna, Miles, Vo. The following members were present voting no, their machines malfunctioned. Show them voting no: King of Taylor and Mrs. Riddle. Bear with us a moment, members, while we count votes. Members, there being 70 ayes and 67 nays, the motion to table prevails. Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Dutton.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: While we're changing around, folks, move to excuse Representative Truitt due to severe illness on the motion of Patricia Harless. Move to excuse Representative Craddick because of important business in the district, on the motion of Representative Parker. Do I hear objections? Hearing none. Approved.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker, members, what this amendment does is try to strike the balance that I think you've heard a lot of discussion about before. Now it just simply says that a public or private employer may purchase an insurance policy to cover any liability that the employer might be exposed to. And, as a result of that, the employer can pass that cost on, of the the policy, to the employees who transport or store their firearms on to the premises. And it's acceptable to me.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this would not be equitable to the employees. This would put a burden upon any employee who has a CHL, or wishes to have a firearm. It -- There are all sorts of risk in the workplace, and to put the burden upon the employees that have CHLs for firearms in the parking lot to pay for additional insurance that we don't know what it costs, is not fair to those employees. That would be picking them out as a class of people to cover the insurance. Employees are not commonly required to pay for the employers' insurance in the State of Texas, and this would not be a good precedent and I'm opposed to this amendment. I move to table.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Dutton to close.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker, members, this is an amendment that I drafted in response to the previous amendment which we defeated. And so, for that reason, since that amendment got defeated I don't think that we need this one. But I do think that when you impose a cost on an employer, the employer ought to have someplace to transfer that cost. And what this amendment did is simply say that the people what want to benefit, by virtue of bringing their weapons on to the premises, would simply pay for the cost of a insurance policy that the employer had to buy. That seems to me to be far more reasonable than just about anything I've heard here. Except my next amendment. And so, with that, I'm going to withdraw that amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Dutton.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Dutton.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker, members, one other thing that troubles me about the bill more than anything else, is the fact that it goes beyond persons who have a CHL. It says, if you read the bill, it says not only do you permit people who have a concealed handgun license on to the premises, but everybody else who somehow or another believes that they are lawfully carrying a weapon. That's the real danger in this bill. I have learned to come full circle on concealed handgun licenses, because it does demonstrate that those people happen to be a little bit more responsible, because they've gone through the courses, they've learned how to the handle the weapon, they've learned the rules of the law. And so it seems to me that this bill ought to be restricted to those persons. But we don't restrict it to just people with a concealed handgun license. We limit it to no body. Everybody can come on to the premises, every employee-employer that you have that this employer hires can now come on to the premises of the parking lot with a handgun. I think what we're doing is inviting illegal activity by doing so. We ought to limit this bill to just those people who have been through this course, who have a concealed handgun license, who we have determined would be responsible in a situation where they can legally transport their handgun. And that's what this amendment does.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Members, I oppose this amendment. What this amendment does is it's huge step backward for the Second Amendment rights in the State of Texas. We have gone to great lengths to pass a statute in the past that allows people who legally have firearms to carry those firearms in their vehicles, and not to have to got through all those hoops of am I traveling, am I this or am I that, and this would be a huge step backward for that. And, in fact, it somewhat surprises me, because, folks, we have to understand that these CHL licenses cost money to go out and get. It's $200 to $400 to get a CHL these days. You pay to take the course, you pay for the pictures and all of that. And so what this amendment does is that this amendment would essentially stop people in the poor and lower middle class who cannot afford to go get a CHL license, this would prevent them from protecting themselves as they commute to work. And I move to table the amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Dutton to close.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker, members, I think Mr. Kleinschmidt got it right. This amendment is about whether you ought to have a CHL license, or whether you don't need one in this state. This amendment is the first attempt that I know of, where at least when we started down this road of CHL licenses, this gets us all the way over to the other side of field where you don't have to have one. Now, if that's the case, then I think what we ought to do is decide to do away with CHL licenses; because that's what this bill does. This amendment tries to stop that. This amendment tries say look, wait a minute, the people who have concealed handgun licenses have demonstrated a responsibility to that we have imposed on them, and they certainly ought to be able to carry their gun to certain places, and one of those places ought to be on the parking lot of the employer. That's what the bill says. But the bill goes even further and says you know, you don't really need a concealed handgun license. You can just come on to the premises --

JOE STRAUS: For what purpose, Mr. Burman?

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I would be glad to yield to the colonel.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: Thank you, Harold. Harold, when you have a CHL license you can carry in a car; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: That 's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: And if you don't have a CHL license, you can carry in a car; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I think it's in limited instances. It's not nearly as broad as a person who has a CHL license.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: Now if you have a CHL license, you can carry right here on this floor; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, I guess. I'm not sure about that.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: It is, it is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: You can carry it on the House floor? Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: If you don't have a CHL license, can you carry on the floor?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I'd have to ask one of my colleagues who I know doesn't have a license, but is carrying.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: No, it's not correct.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I don't know.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: If you don't have a CHL license, you're not supposed to have it here. You can carry in your car and that is all. But if you have a CHL license you can carry any where, except those places restricted by state law. There's a big difference.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well , I think the distinction I'm trying to make is that if we're going to commit every person to carry now onto the premises of their employers, if we're going to do that --

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: That's only in a car, though.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But by problem with that is that that includes everybody who is employed. And, clearly, I don't think that's what we intend. I don't think we intended that everybody who is employed is going to carry their gun now in their car.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: But we changed that two years ago, when we allowed people to carry in their car mostly for travel.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But that's exactly right. But you're supposed to be going from point A to point B.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: Point A and point B. And now, if this bill passes, on to a parking lot.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: That 's a complete change. You don't have a follow that at all. All you have to do now is -- and I'm not sure about the legalities of it, but you're going to be okay if you go to the premises of the parking lot of your employer and you have your gun. And they say well, where is your license? And you say well, I don't have one. I don't how that's supposed to work. I think we are in better shape if we require everybody who participates in this bill to have a concealed handgun license, because some of the things you have heard already about liability and trying to limit it has to do with those people. Those people who do not have a concealed handgun license, because they have been deemed somewhat less than responsible than the people who do, because they probably haven't had a class.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: That's a whole different question, though. The only point I was trying to make with my question was that there is a difference as to where you can carry, where with a CHL and where you cannot carry if you don't have a CHL.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: As well it should. And I think you will agree with me that there should be a distinction to how we treat people with the CHL license and how we treat those who don't.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: I agree.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And this bill doesn't make that distinction.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO BERMAN: Thank you, Harold.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: It dumps them all into the same group, and I think that's dangerous. At least it seems to me. Thank you, General.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Legler, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I would yield, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Harold, I was wondering as I'm listening to this, and it's important, because I have a whole lot of industry and a whole lot of business in my area, but I also have a lot of people that go hunting and fishing and other things. So if they were going on a Friday afternoon and went to work and put their shotgun in the car to go bird hunting or they put their rifle in their car to go deer hunting after they leave work, would your amendment say that they can do that?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: No. My amendment just simply says that if you have a concealed handgun license this bill applies to you. If it doesn't, and in the situation you describe, there is in reason, I believe, for you to bring your gun on to somebody else premises who perhaps doesn't want it in there; and you don't have a concealed handgun license.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: In other words, a lot of my people I know, they'll throw their stuff in the the back of a car, or whatever, in the truck, and they'll go on a Friday morning they'll throw it in the back; they'll go to work and they have the deer rifle or they have their shotgun and --

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Rifl es are not affected.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: They're not? I thought you said CHL.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Rifl es are not affected.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I thought it said firearms.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: No. It says storing -- No. What my bill does is it only restricts it to CHL folks. But what you're talking about is another provision in the statute that allows you to carry your rival unconcealed, and you can carry it in your truck.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Your amendment does not say anything about the shotguns or --

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: No, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: -- or semi-automatics or deer rifles or anything like that?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: No, sir. It doesn't touch that. No, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Or rifles or anything like that?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: No, sir. That's already in the statute.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: They can carry it on to a parking lot?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: And so what does your bill say, that we're not allowed to carry in a parking lot? In other words, a man can carry a shotgun or a semi-automatic rifle, but he could not carry a handgun?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: This , is as I understand it, my amendment applies to people who have handguns, because it talks about people who have CHL licenses. You don't get a CHL license to carry a shotgun.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: So you're saying that I could bring a shotgun on there, or a rifle on there, but -- if they didn't have a CHL. But they cannot bring handgun with them?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: If they don't have a CHL license, that would be the case, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: But they can bring their shotgun and a rifle?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Unde r the current law, yes. Even if this bill doesn't pass they can do that.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Right. So that's what I'm trying to figure out, why you would bring this on there.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Why what?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: A shotgun is just as deadly as a firearm -- as a handgun.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, this doesn't make that distinction. You're changing this from this bill to something else and we're not on that bill. That may be a subject for another day. What this amendment talks about is simply who is going to be applied in this bill. And now it says -- Hold on, I don't think you've read the bill. Now it says that people who have a CHL, and everybody else who has considered themselves legally okay to carry a gun, okay? What I'm trying to tell you is that that's part that scares me, that's the part that apparently scares a lot of people, otherwise we wouldn't have had this debate on all of this limiting liability. The reason for that is because the bill goes beyond CHL, folks, and now extends it to some folks that haven't had classes, who may come on to the premises of their employer and cause all kind of trouble because they don't really know what it's about.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: One more time, you know. I'm sorry, I'm a little slow. So if I have a -- if I don't have a CHL license --

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Unde r my amendment you can't bring your gun, your handgun, on to the premises.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I cannot bring my handgun on there?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I'm sorry?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I cannot bring my handgun on there?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: That 's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I can bring my shotgun?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But this doesn't talk about shotgun.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: But I can bring my shotgun?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: You can bring that under current law, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: So I can't bring my handgun, but I can bring my shotgun?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I'm sorry?

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I can't bring a handgun because I don't have a CHL license?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: You are arguing against another law, is what you don't realize. That's what I think you're slow about.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I get it.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . Thank you. I've got a slow feed, too. But I don't have it right now. The point is that if you're going to require people, require employers to allow folks on to their parking premises, and you can say well, you can bring your gun on here; I think employers of Texas would simply look at us say look, could you just require those folks who you have required to go through courts and get a CHL to be the only people eligible under this bill? That's what this amendment does. And I would ask you to vote no on the motion to table.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Burkett raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt to close. Representative Dutton sends up an amendment. Representative Kleinschmidt moves to table. The vote is on the motion to table. The clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Kleinschmidt voting aye. Showing Representative Dutton voting no. Have all voted? There being 103 ayes and 35 nays, the motion to table prevails. Madam Doorkeeper?

MADAM DOORKEEPER: Mr. Speaker, I have a messenger from the Senate at the door of the House.

JOE STRAUS: Admit the messenger.

SENATE MESSENGER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm directed by the Senate to inform the House --

JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Turner.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Turner.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members, if you would just take a moment, just look at the amendment. It does not say that we're going to prevent people from bringing their firearms or ammunition to the parking lot. The premise of this amendment essentially says that employers, employers are the ones that own the property, they purchased the property, they are providing the jobs to the employees; and they should have every right -- in balancing the interest of Representative Kleinschmidt, they should every right to designate a parking area for those who are carrying the firearms or ammunition. So, essentially, what the amendment says, in trying to strike a balance, it says that the section does not prohibit an employer from requiring an employee transporting a firearm or ammunition to park the employee's vehicle in a specific designated parking lot, parking garage or other parking area the employer provides for employees. And that's all that it does. It simply says that in an attempt to balance the interest of the employer who owns the property, who is providing the job; that I, as an employer of 26 years, if I'm paying my money and it's my property and it's my land and I'm giving you a job, I'm providing you the insurance and the benefits, I ought to have every right to decide where you park in my parking garage or my parking lot. That's all that it says. And I hope that the amendment is acceptable to the author.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Sheffield, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Would the gentleman answer a couple of questions, please?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Turner?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I would be more than happy to.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Sylvester , you know, I've been an employer for like 36 years in restaurants and so forth. And we have a designated parking spot for our employees now, and a lot of businesses do that, they have designated parking spots. How do you define where the guns are or not in your amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Basically , this is essentially saying if you're carrying a firearm or ammunition and, as an employer, this is where I want you to park.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Okay. I have ten parking spots out here, and five of them are for the guys carrying guns and five of them are going to be for the guys who are not carrying guns. So I guess the people out there that like to steal guns are going to know where the guns are, right?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: It's just like, for example, handicap parking, we designate special space for them. You can have ten employees and they could all, for example, be disabled.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: I think you missed my point earlier. We actually have designated parking right now for our employees. Number one, we don't want them parking at the best parking spots, those are for the customers. And, number two, we do want them to be able to park at a place that is somewhat convenient for them so we know where they are parking. We know where most of our employees are parking. And big industrials, they do the exact same thing.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: So, I mean, how do you separate though we're going to have ten spot for the guys that have guns and ten spots for those that don't.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Right. This is this point I'm trying to make, Ralph. I am the employer, I am the owner, I'm giving you a job, I'm paying your insurance, I'm paying your fringe benefits, as I have done for 26 years. The parking lot belongs to me. And if you want to bring your firearm, not a problem. And if you, the government, if you are telling me I must provide parking spaces, not a problem. But I'll be darned if you're going to tell me, and I'm paying the bill, that I can't designate where I want these employees to be. Now, if they want to work for me, you're trying to tell me that if they want to work for me I got to pay them and pay them insurance and pay the benefits, and they're going to tell me that my private parking lot they can park where ever they want to? I'm not hearing that.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: I really disagree with you, Representative.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And my bill is permissive to the employer. Now, if you, as an employer, if you want to open up your entire parking lot, go for it.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Again, you've missed my point. So we have designated parking now. So what you're telling me, as an employer, I'm going to have five people park here in these spaces and, guess what guys, these guys have guns. So I'm a thief, and I know from past experience that my buddy parks in this spot, and let's catch them off guard and let's go steal all those guns tonight.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: But they can do that right now, Ralph. This is the point that I'm trying to make.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: No, they can't. Because they are going to know where those cars that got guns in, other than the fact that every other car may have a gun.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Ralph, this is my point. If I am the employer and I've been an employer for 26 years myself, except from a part of the legislature, except from a part from my staff, I have been an employer for 26 years. I paid their insurance for 26 years. I paid their salaries for 26 years. And if I am paying for that parking lot I have every right to designate where I want you to park. If you, as the State of Texas, if you are telling me that these employees have a right to be on this parking lot with their firearm and ammunition, I'm saying okay. But, as the employer, I have the right to designate where I want them to park.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Well, I disagree. I think you're mandating an employer something that he doesn't need to do right now.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Say that again.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: I said I believe that you're amendment is just mandating the employer on how to tell the employees where to park. And that's very unfair. And that's all I need to say. I disagree with your amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Are you not mandating -- Look, this is the point that I'm trying to -- I'm not trying to be complicated and I'm not trying to defeat his bill. I'm the employer, I'm giving the jobs, I'm paying the benefits. Now, is the State of Texas going to tell me, as a private employer that's providing the job, that if they carry a firearm and ammunition they can park any where on my private property and I'm giving the jobs and I'm paying the benefits? All I'm saying is that you, and when I'm saying you I'm saying the State of Texas, if you are saying that an employee has the right to park on the parking lot, I am saying I hear you, the State of Texas. I hear you. But as the private owner and the private employer I have -- and I don't like what you just -- and I don't like your bill, if I'm the employer, so I may not like the bill. I have the right to designate which parking garage or which parking lot or which parking spaces I want those people carrying firearms and ammunition to park.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Can I ask one question? What difference would it make? I got ten parking spots, they're all right next to each other. What difference would it make knowing where that employee is parking? What difference would it make?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: The difference is, the difference is it's my property, not yours. I'm providing the job, not you. I'm providing the fringe benefits, and you -- and I'm saying you, the State of Texas, not you personally, and I'm saying when you start paying the rent and the bills then you can dictate where you want them to park. But, for now, this is where I want them to be. As a private owner I think I should have that right.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Burkett raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Members, I oppose this amendment. And as it has been well stated, if you start segregating the cars that have guns and don't, you might as well put a neon sign on the sides of ones that have guns that say steal me. From a practical standpoint, it's pretty well accepted, folks, that there are already guns in these parking lots. And so when you try to segregate them you're simply segregating the one that comply with the ones -- there are still going to be guns in that parking lot. And most of the parking lots, you're going to have visitors. All the CHLs, all the people that are carrying legally are going to be parking in those spots any ways. It's not a practical approach and it doesn't make a good common sense approach to mark these cars with a steal me sign. I move to table the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Spea ker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman yield just for a second?

JOE STRAUS: Kleinschmidt, do you yield.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Represen tative, when you read the amendment what the amendment simply says is that the State of Texas cannot prohibit the private employer from designating parking spaces. And it's permissive. It doesn't mandate anything. It allows an employer to decide how they want to utilize their private property for their employees.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: My experience in researching this bill and talking to many people has been that when you give one of the companies that may have foreign ownership, foreign control outside of the State of Texas, when you give them an inch they will take a mile. And they will impose upon their employees in any form or fashion they can, because you have companies that are owned by shareholders.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: But, Representative Kleinschmidt, you're talking about foreign owners. I'm talking about there are foreign owners that own property in the State of Texas. Should they not be protected from eminent domain or maybe not? I mean we're talking about private property owners now. I really -- And I will be honest with you, I really thought this was an amendment that would appeal to those who own private property and value a person owning private property and the right to utilize their property as they so choose. But your bill -- your bill is mandating how an employer can utilize their own property. Is that not the case? Am I missing something here?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: It amazes me that there should be a proponent of segregation is what amazes me. Just kidding. I'm just kidding.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Now for saying that now -- you ought to spot me 30 votes on that one now.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I'm simply commenting you're segregating the gun owners and the gun carriers out from the -- It seriously will slap a neon sign on the vehicle.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: There is no sign that is going to say that these are the gun toting people in the parking lot.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Burkett raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Chair recognizes Representative Turner to close.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And I won't be very long, I really won't. And maybe I'm a little bit confused. We are talking about employers and we are talking about people that own their own property. And this happens to be their parking lot and they're providing jobs and they are paying the tab and they are paying the employee. This bill doesn't say that they just that they shall, it says that is we can't prohibit them from having designated areas if they so desire. Now I don't how this apply in rural Texas, but if you're in urban cars and you got a whole lot of parking spaces and you may be an employer who doesn't particularly like this bill, all this amendment does is provide an employer with the flexibility to work with the mandate we are putting on them. That's all that this is going to do. It's intending to give employers flexibility. Now, Representative Kleinschmidt talked about foreign owners and all of that. This amendment is not intending to deal with any of that, it grants employers the flexibility to designate where the parking spots should be, if they so chose. That's all that it is intended to do.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: Mr. Speaker , will the gentleman yield for a question?

JOE STRAUS: Turner, do you yield.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I'd be more than happy to.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: Now, Sylvester, I'm just thinking if I own a parking lot, and I know there's going to be a lot of cars with guns, and I know that guns are valuable, and I know a lot of cars are getting broken into, and it's going to be hard for to protect all those cars in my big parking lot. But if I can put them all in a certain area it would be easier for me to protect those cars from getting broken into, wouldn't it?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: That is true. That is true, Representative Hartnett.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: And if I'm the employer and I am forced to have all these cars with these guns on my property I'm going to have an interest in making sure that these guns are secured and stored safely on my property, right?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And that is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And, again, there is no sinister plot with this. It really is not. It is intended to give employers flexibility. If they are already doing this, that's fine. It doesn't stop the mandates from this bill. But I don't believe just because you carry a firearm or an ammunition, that your right ought to trump my property right when I'm giving you a job and paying your salary. Now I think that's going a bit far. And I think when people when you start doing all the hiring and you start paying the employees, then you put this out there. But as long as I'm paying the tab I think I ought to have the right to decide where you're going to park. I'm not telling you not to bring your gun, but I think I ought to have every right to tell my employees if the State says you can carry it and you can bring your firearm and you're working for me, I have a right to tell you where you're going to park on my lot if I'm paying the bill. Now that's the way we do it in the State of Texas. And this bill sounds like some bill coming from Germany or France or some place else. I would ask you again, I would ask that you vote no on the motion to table, respectfully.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Kleinschmidt sends up an amendment. Representative Turner sends up an amendment. Representative Kleinschmidt moves to table. It's on the motion to table. Clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Kleinschmidt voting aye. Representative Turner voting no. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 93 ayes, 43 nays, the motion to table prevails. Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Castro.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Castro.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, my amendment simply says that an employer may conduct inspections to ensure that an employee is complying with the requirements that are set out in the bill, in order to be able to carry a firearm or ammunition and park it on private property on the employer's private property or lease property. If you look at the bill, Section 52.061 of the bill, which is entitled restriction of prohibiting employee access to, or storage of firearm or ammunition, there are at least three conditions, implicit conditions which an employee must meet in order to be able to carry a firearm or ammunition on to that parking lot. First, they have to have a CHL right, a concealed handgun license. Second, the ammunition or firearm must be in a locked, privately owned vehicle. And, finally, that vehicle that CHL owner who has the ammunition or firearm in a privately owned vehicle, has to have it in a parking area that is provided for by the employer. Now, each of those conditions must be met. The problem with the bill right now as it stands is there is no way for an employer to be sure that the employee is meeting all of these conditions. In other words, in the bill, there isn't written into the bill any way for the employer to make sure that the employee is complying with those conditions. So what my amendment does is it simply gives them the right to make sure that the employees are complying. After all, we are mandating that they have this on their property and I think it's fair that we also give them the right that we make sure people are complying with the regulations of the bill. With that, I would move adoption of the amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Members, this is simply not practical. It won't work. There is no way to conduct inspections of these vehicles in the parking lots, because these firearms are not supposed to be in view of the vehicles, so you wouldn't even to know which vehicles to practically inspect and which ones not to. It simply does not work in the real world. And I move to table.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Castro to close.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN CASTRO: Again, folks, you know we're dealing with employers. This is private property. If Representative Kleinschmidt disagrees with this amendment, in other words if we're not going give employers any way to verify that employees are doing what they're supposed to do to have this privilege under the law, then what's the point of the bill? The only bill that you would need to pass in order to accomplish what he wants is to say that an employee can't check -- can never check the vehicle -- an employee an employer can never check an employee's vehicle. That would accomplish the same thing as passing this bill, because that would allow somebody to have a gun or a bazooka, a bomb, anything you want. So, with that, I know that there will be a motion to table. There was a motion to table. I would move against the motion to table.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Castro sends up an amendment. Representative Kleinschmidt motions to table. This is on the the motion to table. Clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Kleinschmidt voting aye. Showing Representative Castro voting no. Have all voted? Representative Branch -- Have all voted? There being 105 ayes, 30 nays; motion to table prevails. Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment. Excuse Representative Rodriguez because of important business in the district, on the motion of Representative Munoz. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

CLERK: Amendment by Burnam.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Burnam.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this amendment simply addresses the concern that I was raising my point of order. If you look at the definition in the penal code, which is the last section of the bill as filed, it is much more comprehensive than what the bill has been represented. So this amendment is intended to simply do what the bill analysis said it was going to do, which would allow what the author of the bill was trying to accomplish, without allowing them to take guns on other part of the grounds of the campus of the business. Move its adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Members, the statutory language used to define premises as in potential code, it's out there. It's been used. To add another term of premises in the law today just doesn't get us anywhere. It's not practical. It just leads to more questions in the statute. Penal codes --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Burnam, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Would the speaker yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: On the penal code, it's defined, is that not correct; in the Senate Bill? Or it's referred to in the Senate Bill?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: It refers to the section of the penal code that defines premises.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Right. And in the penal code the way they define premises is strictly the building, it does not apply to the grounds, the sidewalk, the picnic areas or any other aspect of the facility; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: That is correct. It does not include the parking lot.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So don't understand. All I'm trying to do is better define what you see in your bill analysis you are trying to do to make sure it does what you say in your opening comments about the bill. All I'm trying to do is define it to do what you say it does. So what's your objection?

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Well, I just think the bill stays a lot cleaner if you don't add a new definition to the statutes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNHAM: Well, there's this misrepresentation going on as to whether or not we intend to open this up or actually do what you said you did, both in the subject line and in the HRO report. And I'm just I'm, you know, we're talking about honesty in communication about what's going on. So I'm just trying to give a clearer definition.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Well, an amendment ought to help clarify the statute and this doesn't help. It simply adds an additional definition to the statute.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNHAM: So what you're saying is if it's your intent in this legislation that it be restricted to parking lots and the people not be able to carry guns around in various other parts of the the campus of the business facility.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: This is a parking lot bill. There is no intention for employees to be able to carry their firearms beyond the employees' parking lot. (Inaudible) and visit in their (inaudible) their locked vehicle in the parking lot.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, may I ask that this exchange between the author be reduced to writing and put in the House Journal?

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: I move to table, members.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Burnam to close.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, members, now that I have established that I withdraw the amendment. Thank you.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against Senate Bill 321? If not, Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt to close.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of Senate Bill 321. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed nay. The ayes have it and Senate Bill 321 passes to engrossment. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 257. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB257 by Hildebran. Relating to the presumed abandonment of certain unclaimed personal property.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hildebran.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill we had up a little earlier. This bill is not a forfeiture bill, it's AN abandoned properties bill where if property sits dormant in private institutions, and all we're changing is the schedule in which time it moves from the private institutions that it's dormant in, to the state. But it's in perpetuity that the State always has to refund those claimed properties forever. So it's not a forfeiture bill. We do have a number of amendments, we talk to the parties. Sylvester, we have the amendment ready so you might want to come up here next. And we're going accept about three or four amendments and we'll have this bill wrapped up and ready to go.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Kleinschmidt moves to lay House Bill 681 on table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Hildebrand.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hildebrand.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Mr. Spe aker, members, this is an amendment that adds another category, which will add another category of unclaimed property, which was in the nontax revenue recommendations. Move adoption. Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mrs. Davis, for what purpose? Would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Hildebrand, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Yeah. What is the unclaimed?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: That's -- This one is in the Senate study they did last week, it adds the stocks security bill to the unclaimed property. Same rules apply to the ones we have in this bill, which means it's not a forfeiture, but when it's unclaimed it goes to the to the state, the Comptroller, so that we can use that for certification purposes. And I want to reiterate, the conversation -- when you laid out the bill you did indicate that this is in fact not a forfeiture?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: This is not a forfeiture bill. And every citizen has the right to reclaim their funds, right?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Absolute ly. Absolutely. Okay. When you add this other provision to it, what is the -- how much does that raise for us?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: 38 mill ion. The one, the amendment that you just put on does 38 million by itself?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Yeah. It adds to the 78 million. But we're going to take away some money that's going to extend the period, so we're going take away a little money on the original bill that came, and then we're going add some. Okay. So at the end of the day what are we trying to reach?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: I think we're trying to reach about 110, approximately 110. But all of the amendments remain nonforfeiture amendments?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Absolute ly. One other thing I wanted to ask, in regard to this 110 million that we're raising, which budget would these funds be available for certification?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Where does it go? No, I'm assuming, based on our earlier consequences, these funds would be moved to our treasury quicker so we can use them for certification purposes.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Absolute ly. Which budget does this --

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Oh, for the next biennium, the one for September. Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Move adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Hildebrand sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Turner.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Turner.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you, chairman and Mr. Speaker. In the conversations with Representative Hildebrand we talked about the utility deposit. Presently there is three years to claim it from the utility, and the bill is moving it to one, now we're going back up to 18 months. So, to be clear of what happens, the people will make the deposit, it sits in the utilities for three years before it moves over to the Comptroller's Office, but people still have the right to claim with their deposit. This simply speeds up the time period so that the utilities will hold it instead of three years, they will hold it for 18 months, then the deposit shifts over to the Comptroller for certification purposes, but people can still claim their deposits for an indefinite period of time. I want to thank Representative Hildebrand for working with me on it.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Turner sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Sheets.

JOE STRAUS: The Chair recognizes Representative Sheets. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment simply excludes military members from the abandoned property provision. I believe the amendment is acceptable to the author.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheets sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. The Chair recognizes Representative Hildebrand.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 257? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 257. All those in favor say aye, those opposed nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 257 is passed to engrossment. The Chair recognizes Representative Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, members, I'm going to move to suspend all necessary rules. We have set a Wednesday calendar, and so I'm going to ask you permission so we can add more of your bills to tomorrow's calendar. So, members, I move to suspend all necessary rules to allow the Calendar Committee to meet this evening and set additional bills on Wednesday's calendar, and to allow the Wednesday calendar to be revised to reflect the addition of the additional bills, and the revised calendar with the added bills to be eligible for consideration by the House tomorrow at 10:00 a.m.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Eiland, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Does the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: For those of us that are not on the committee, do we get to see which bills you're considering before granting permission?

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Mr. Eiland, it's an evolving process.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Are any of my bills on there?

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: We haven't set the June calendar, Mr. Eiland.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Raymond, for what purpose? Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Yes. Would that be for Wednesday of this week?

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Yes. Central Standard Time, in Texas. Thank you.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Showing Mr. Hunter voting aye. Showing Mr. Eiland voting no. Have all voted?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Mr. Speak er?

JOE STRAUS: For what purpose, Mr. Gallego?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Parliamen tary inquiry.

JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: If we're adding bills to tomorrow, does that mean that we are not planning on taking up the fiscal matters bill tomorrow?

JOE STRAUS: The fiscal matters bill was postponed until 8:00 a.m. tomorrow.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Right. So it will be ahead of all of these bills on the calendar. If we follow the normal calendar procedure, since we're adding bills to the the calendar, and I mean I know that there were several hundred or 150 amendments or so on the fiscal matters bill, and I take it that since we're adding to the calendar that we're not doing fiscal matters?

JOE STRAUS: That is incorrect. The bill will be eligible tomorrow at 8:00 a.m.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Mr. Speak er, I know that it would be eligible at 8:00 a.m. I'm asking is it the Chair's intent, or do we know if it's the author's intent to hear the bill or to postpone the bill again for another day?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Gallego, I suggest you visit with Mr. Pitts.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That was my question.

JOE STRAUS: Thank you. There being 134 aye and 0 nays, the suspension is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, members, I request permission for the Committee on Calendars to meet while the House is in session at 8:00 p.m. today, May 3rd, in 3W15 to consider a calendar.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. The following announcement, the clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Calendars will meet at 8:00 p.m. on May the 3rd, 2011, at 3W16. This will be a formal meeting to consider a calendar. Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Isaac, for what purpose? I have an environmental and fiscal and parliamentary inquiry.

JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry. I'd like to request that no additional copies of this prefiled packet be printed. It's a huge expense and 406 pages, I think the members can hang on to it themselves until tomorrow.

JOE STRAUS: Thank you, Mr. Isaacs. Thank you.

JOE STRAUS: Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 865. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB865 by Creighton. Relating to the composition and use of money in the rural water assistance fund.

JOE STRAUS: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 865 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 360. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB360 by Fraser. Relating to the composition and use of money in the rural water assistance fund.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Creighton. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, the Water Development Board administers the Rural Water Assistance Fund that we created in 2001 to obtain low cost financing for water and water related projects. This House Bill would consolidate the existing water project funding programs allowing the Water Development Board to offer these entities a one-stop shop for a all financial assistance. The bill would simplify the process of funding of rural water projects, that includes nonprofit water suppliers, small cities and counties of 50,000 or less; and the bill would add flexibility in how the fund would be supported. There's no fiscal note. It may save local governments money. There was no opposition in committee and I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 360? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of Senate Bill 360. All those in favor say aye, those oppose no. The ayes have it. Senate Bill 360 is passed to engrossment. Representative Creighton moves to lay House Bill 865 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 945. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB495 by Dukes. Relating to the dis-proportionality of certain groups in the juvenile justice, child welfare, health, and mental health systems and the dis-proportionality of the delivery of certain services in the education system.

JOE STRAUS: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 945 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 501. The clerk will read the bill. SB501 by West. Relating to the dis-proportionality of certain groups in the juvenile justice, child welfare, health, and mental health systems and the dis-proportionality of the delivery of certain services in the education system.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Dukes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, members, Senate Bill 501 establishes interagency counsel for addressing dis-proportionality within the juvenile justice, child welfare, justice, mental health and education systems. It will establish a board that will review positive outcomes for use on dis-proportionality and health. There's no fiscal note on this bill and I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 501? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of Senate Bill 501. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed say no. The ayes have it, Senate Bill 501 is passed to engrossment. Representative Dukes moves to lay House Bill 945 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Please excuse the members of the Calendar Committee because of a committee meeting, on the motion of Representative Patrick. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second read House Bill 961. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB961 by Turner. Relating to the sealing of and restricting access to juvenile records of adjudications of delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Turner.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Spea ker and members, in 2007 we lowered the age for people in TYC from 21 to 19. This bill, HB961, addresses the age limit to respect restrictive access and the felony sealing records, dropping the age from 21 to, 19 and on restrictive access from 21 to 17. That's all that it does. I think there's an amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Gallego.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment essentially brings the bill in line with something that was done in the 81st Legislature, with the passage of Senate Bill 1956. And it is acceptable to the author.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Gallego sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Turner.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Move adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 961? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 961. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 961 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1009. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1009 by Callegari. Relating to procedures for obtaining informed consent before certain postmortem examinations or autopsies.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Callegari. Mr. Speaker, members, House Bill 1009 outlines the process for a decedent's family to provide informed consent to an autopsy. It would require the decision (inaudible) to be given the opportunity to consent to an autopsy, and to have some say in the autopsy; as well as control of the disposition of the organs and tissues after the procedure. It would also allow that to request that the physician not be associated with the institution where their family member died. I move passage. Mr. Speaker, do you yield? Would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Callegari, do you yield? Yes, I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you, Mr. Callegari. Thank you for bringing this bill forward. I just wanted to ask one question as far as we can down to legislative intent. This bill addresses the disposition of organs, prosthetic devices and tissue after the autopsy examination has been completed, correct? Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: May one of those methods of disposition includes the use of organs, prosthetic devices and tissue for research, scientific purposes or therapeutic purposes or education? Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Zerwas, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to have the remarks between myself and Chairman Callegari reduced to writing and placed in the journal.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Move adoption.

JOE STRAUS: The following amendment, clerk read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Gallego.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is an amendment that clarifies an issue on what happens when there are several members of a family, a brother or a sister, and one member agrees and the other member. Doesn't kind of makes sure the family gets together on an agreement. I believe it is acceptable to the author.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Gallego sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Callegari. Move adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1009? Now the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1009. All those in favor say aye, all those oppose no. The ayes have it. House Bill 109 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1389. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1389 by Hopson. Relating to criminal penalties for the owner of a dog that attacks another person.

JOE STRAUS: Is Mr. Geren on the floor of the House? Chair recognizes Representative Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Yes, thank you very much. This, Mr. Hopsons' bill, that deals with attacks on individuals where a dog has been involved. This makes sure there is a penalty for that. And that will be it. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1389? Now the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1389. All those in favor say aye. A record vote has been requested. Record vote has been granted. Clerk will ring the bell. Vote aye, vote nay. Showing Representative Raymond voting aye. Showing Representative Vo voting aye. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 123 ayes, 7 nays; House Bill 1389 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1604. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1604 by Guillen. Relating to the regulation of subdivisions in counties, including certain border and economically distressed counties.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen. I do have an amendment. Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Howard, for what purpose? Will the gentleman yield for a question? I couldn't hear.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Martinez raises a point of order on House Bill 1604. The point of order is temporarily withdrawn. Chair recognizes Representative Guillen. I temporarily postpone this bill until 8:30.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1700. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1700 by Coleman. Relating to employment of physicians by certain hospitals.

JOE STRAUS: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 1700 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 894. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB894 by Duncan. Relating to employment of physicians by certain hospitals.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Senate Bill 894 allows critical access to hospitals, sole community hospitals and hospitals in counties with a population of 50,000 or less to directly employee physicians. What it does is gives physician a choice between hanging up their own shingles or working directly for a hospital. It gives the -- Having the option to employee physicians would help rural hospitals improve and preserve access to physicians, as well as save physicians the cost of opening a practice. This bill does not authorize the governing body of a hospital to supervise or engage in the practice of medicine. Also in the bill, and what's really important, we worked with the Texas Medical Association, the Torch Rural Hospital Association and the Texas Hospital Association to make sure -- and the physicians, to make sure that no one can force them to practice medicine in a way that's not within their scope. And there is a process for redress, if that is the case, that involves the medical board. And that was a very important provision that was included at the request of the Texas Medical Association. And, with that, I'll stop on the lay out and be happy to answer questions. Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Hardcastle, for what purpose? Would the gentleman yield for a couple of technical questions?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Yes, of course. Mr. Coleman, Mr. Chairman, is this the result of six or more years of several of us in this House working on a negotiation with -- to have a finely tuned bill with several stakeholders?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: That is correct, Mr. Chairman. And what's very important to know is that you and others have been working on this particular issue for ten or more years, to make sure you have an opportunity to have physicians that will stay in rural areas, because of the reduction their overhead and becoming part of that community. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you championing this idea for the last ten years, at least.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: It's my pleasure.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: I'd be happy to yield to Representative Dr. Shelton.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Thank you, Chairman Coleman. I appreciate it. You know this session, Chairman, we've made some significant change in the cooperate practice of medicine, mostly for rural areas with critical access areas; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: And so in doing so we need to have measures to protect physician's autonomy. I suspect I am the only person in chamber that is actually an employed physician, and I will tell you they are a pretty high maintenance group. And one of the things that is really important is that physicians maintain their autonomy, so that the -- when you go to your doctor your doctor is working for you and not the hospital. So could you share for me what is in this bill that protects physician autonomy from undue pressure, such as, Doctor, You didn't order enough MRIs this month?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Yeah, what's important here is that as you said that the hospital cannot force the physicians to do something outside of their practice. Within this bill what it does is set up a mechanism through the medical board of the hospital, and the medical director, with a link O the Texas Medical Board on any issues that have to do with having a physician do something that is not within their practice or coercion. And that physician is go to the doctor who is the head of hospital to make that complaint, and then that complaint goes to the medical board. No different than our discussion in Public Health about the peer discipline that we have in our medical board system. This allows the medical board to act on behalf of that physician and make sure there's no undue influence against his practice of medicine.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: So in your bill is the physician's employment dependent upon doing as the hospital says?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: No.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Okay. Now --

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: I'm having a hard time hearing you, too. There's kind of an echo.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Now is it your intent to expand this bill to physicians who work in rural or other critical access areas, or is this --

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: This bill here today, SB -- the 1700 and SB894, there's no intention to expand this bill any further. The intention, I hope, is to pass this bill off the floor of the House and send it to the governor.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Speaker, can we reduce these remarks to writing, please?

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: On behalf of my rural colleagues and joint authors of this bill who have been working on this for a long time, and allowing me to stick my urban nose in their business and trusting me to do this, I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 894? If not, the question occurs on to passage engrossment of Senate Bill 894. All those in favor say aye, those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. Senate Bill 894 is passed to engrossment. Representative Coalman moves to lay House Bill 1700 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. It is so ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1720. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1720 by John Davis of Harris. Relating to improving health care provider accountability and efficiency for the child health plan and Medicaid programs.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Davis.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN E. DAVIS: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members, this relates to improving health care provider accountability and efficiency under the child health plans and Medicaid programs. I believe there's an amendment.

JOE STRAUS: The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by John Davis of Harris.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Davis.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN E. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, and this is a floor amendment that works with the Affordable Care Act to improve things. The payment recovery efforts by the NCO engaged in accordance with applicable rules developed by the commissioner, and lowers the threshold in which the NCO can automatically engage in payment recovery efforts from 200,000 to 100,000. And I move passage, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Davis sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Davis.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN E. DAVIS: Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1720? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1720. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed, no. The ayes have it. House Bill 1720 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading HB1723. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1723 by Lucio. Relating to penalties proscribed for a violation or repeated violation of certain court orders or conditions of bond in a family violence case.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes -- Where is Representative Lucio? Thank you Mr. Speaker and members. HB1723 creates an offense for repeated violations of certain court orders, specifically protective orders from Section 6.504 of Chapter 85 of the Family Code making two or more offenses in a 12 month period punishable by a third degree felony. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1723? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1723. All those in favor say aye. All those oppose say nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 1723 passes to engrossment. Back up, members. Mr. Dutton on the floor of the House? Mr. Dutton on the floor of the House? House Bill 1723, all those in favor say aye, all those oppose nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 1723 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1816. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1816 by Howard of Fort Bend. Relating to vaccination against bacterial meningitis of first-time students at public and private or independent institutions of higher education.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Howard. Members, Senate Bill is over and it is in the House Committee, therefore I postpone House Bill 1816 to a time certain, Thursday, May 5th at 2:00 p.m.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second read House Bill 1971. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1971 by Jackson.. Relating to the liability of a landowner for harm to a trespasser.

JOE STRAUS: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 1971 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 1160. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB1160 Seliger.. Relating to the liability of a landowner for harm to a trespasser.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Jackson. Mr. Speaker, members, Senate Bill 1160 simply puts in statute what's generally recognized as common law regarding trespassing against private property. Courts are generally held to no duty of care of trespassers except in very limited and well defined circumstances. The Legislature previously put in statute limitations for owners for agriculture land. Senate Bill 1160 would simply extend -- I believe there's an amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Lozano. Thank you Mr. Speaker and members, I do have an amendment to this great bill by the Chairman. Basically, what my amendment would do is just allow the landowners in Texas, especially a lot of the large ranch owners, to detail the problem which is occurring, to a great extent, in my district along the border. Basically, what we have are human and drug smugglers evading arrest, crashing through ranch fences. And, in the process, either the illegals or the coyotes, as they're calling themselves, are injured. There is currently a lawsuit in one of my counties in which one of these coyotes is actually suing the landowner who doesn't even reside in the county. These trespassers should not be able to do that. And my amendment would just extend it to cover agricultural land. And it also defines that when they are being pursued by federal law enforcement, and that's the purpose of them entering this property by trespassing, that they're not allowed. And the amendment is acceptable.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Lozano sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Jackson. Move passage. Anyone wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 1160? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of Senate Bill 1160. All those in favor say aye, those opposed nay. The ayes have it. Senate Bill 1160 is passed to engrossment. Representative Jackson moves to lay House Bill 1971 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1942. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1942 by Patrick. Relating to bullying in public schools. Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Hughes, for what purpose? Mr. Speaker, I move that Mr. Jackson's explanation of his bill just passed be placed in the journal for purposes of legislative intent.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Patrick. Members, I'm happy to be here today to move passage for House Bill 1962 related to bullying in Texas public schools. Chairman Eissler appointed a subcommittee on bullying and a bipartisan group of members have worked together to produce House Bill 1942. I would like to thank Dan Huberty, Mark Strama and Todd Smith for their work on that subcommittee; and I appreciate all of my colleagues' hard work on this collaborative effort, that we have a good bill that we can be proud of that will examine the issues of bullying in Texas public schools. Members, House Bill 1942 aims to ensure the safety of our children as it pertains to bullying in public schools, while respecting each school district's independence and implementing a policy that reflects the individual needs of their communities. I have one technical correction amendment that clarifies.

JOE STRAUS: Members, we're waiting on an amendment. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Patrick.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Patrick. This technical correction clarifies in a vehicle as opposed to on the vehicle, and that the policy be published annually in the student and employee district handbooks. It is acceptable to the author.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Patrick sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Members, I move passage of House Bill 1942.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speake r?

JOE STRAUS: Representative Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Will the gentle-lady yield? I certainly will.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Representa tive Patrick, I'm glad you're carrying this legislation. I just have some clarification. Representative Coalman and I have joint authored this similar legislation. I just wanted a bit of clarification. On your draining of school staff about what is bullying and what is -- what constitutes bullying and how to handle it; could you elaborate about the details in your bill? Yes. The staff development training may include the preventing, identifying, responding to and reporting instances of bullying. This is not a requirement. The language is permissive.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. And I also notice that in the bill the bully is transferred, and I don't know if -- my experience has been with constituents that have been bullied, that it's the victim who gets transferred from. So I'm glad to see, correct me if I'm wrong, but the bully is the one who -- or you can now transfer the bully, so the victim isn't victimized twice, correct? Correct. And I appreciate you bringing that point out, because, again, in current legislation the victim is allowed to be transferred at parents' request. But in our bill we are allowing the school board to transfer the bully if it is appropriate and it meets the threshold definition, which is very high, for bullying.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Thank you for that. And another issue that I have had is that parents, when they report an incident of bullying or that their child is being bullied repeatedly, that they simply don't get a response from the school. Can you speak to how your bill provides parents assurances that when they report that their child is being bullied that something will actually happen for our kids?

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: I'm sorry, I apologize. I don't understand your question. Can you repeat it?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: It's been my experience that parents have reported that their child is being bullied and the school administrators have done nothing. And so how does your bill provide those parents assurances that there will be a result when they make such a report?

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: The school board will be required to have a policy, which will address some of the concerns that you have. The bullying prevention policy and procedures will have a definition of bullying, it will describe the effect of the bullying on the child and, also, if will cause the local school board to authorize the transfer of the bully, as we described. But, particularly, I think to address your question, the issue is that the school district will adopt and implement a bullying policy that recognizes at least minimum guidelines.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. And I notice in your bill it also has whistleblower protection, can you speak about that?

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: The person who does the reporting would be protected.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: And it's also -- if they're reporting on a victim or about a witness as well, correct?

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: If you'll let me look just a moment, if you've already identified that in the bill I appreciate you pointing that out to me. It will take me a moment to look through.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Not a problem.

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: Yes. We have a provision that prohibits retaliation against any person, including a victim, a witness or another person who in good faith provides information concerning an incident of bullying. Thank you for pointing that out.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Okay. And I notice also that there's a counseling provision in your bill, and that counseling -- I want to commend you that it will cover the victim, a witness, as well as the bully; correct? representative diane: Yes. It sets out the available counseling option fora far student who is a victim of, a witness to bulling or who engaged in bullying.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. That always has been a concern of mine that bullies are -- they're the bad guys. Also, when someone is so young, whenever there's an opportunity for rehabilitation, bullying is a learning behavior and so if there's a possibly to correct course I think that's important. So I want to commend you on including the bully in the counseling that is available. And when -- and another question, when an incident occurs that's covered by this bill, when are the parents of the victim or the perpetrator notified?

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: The bill establishes a procedure for providing notice of an incident of bullying to a parent or guardian of the district, and a parent or guardian of the the bully within a reasonable amount of time after the incident.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Okay. And one last question. On the reporting, because that was part of Representative Coleman's and my bill.

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: There was a reporting requirement. Is -- And that's not clear to me in your bill. Is there a reporting required?

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: No. It establishes procedures for that, but what we were trying to do in our bill was not establish any type of unfunded mandate for school districts.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Pardon me?

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: We did not want to require an unfunded mandate in terms of reporting to any kind of central office.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. And how does your bill deal with cyber bullying, because that's been a big issue in my area?

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: Yes. That's correct. What we have done is modify the existing definition to include bullying by electronic means.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Terrific. I just want to tell you-all, and this is a pretty good bill, and it's very similar to the legislation that we have carried in the past and I do support it. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: Well, again, I do thank you for your work that you've done. And thank you for your comments this evening. I move passage of House Bill 1942.

JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Simpson.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Simpson.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Members, I have an amendment for this bill that would simply be on page five and go between the lines 21 and 22, and this would provide that a student who exercises reasonable self-defense in response to a bully would not be put in a situation where he is disciplined. This amendment would prohibit the position of a disciplinary measure on a student of a victim of bullying on the basis that is a student's use of reasonable self defense in response to the bullying. This is an amendment that has been supported by most of the superintendents that I was able to contact in my district, and was asked for. There are some provisions in the Education Code, but they don't apply particularly to bullying and they do not apply prior to a disciplinary process being initiated. This amendment would keep someone who exercises reasonable self defense from being disciplined if he did that. I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Aycock to speak in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Members , like many of you I added that amendment and earlier today I spoke with Representative Simpson to explain to him why I was removing my name, requesting my name be removed from that list. I speak against this amendment because in Code 37.001, Section A, in the list of already in code issues, reads self defense. It's already in code. This amendment is unnecessary and I move to table.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Simpson.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: This is -- There is some self defense language in the code, Section 37.001. But if you look at the code there, it does not apply to situations prior to disciplinary action being instituted. And this would prohibit it being instituted right there. And I'll bring it up in just a minute. That part of the code --

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Representative Huberty, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Simpson, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: In just a minute here. This part of the code says it starts out in addition -- and this is to establishing standards for student conduct, the student code of conduct must -- and then it lists one, two, three, four things. And then the fourth item is where the self defense occurs. It says specify whether consideration is given as a factor in a decision to order suspension, removal to disciplinary alternative education program, or expulsion. And then it mentions self defense. So this is a very focused instance where self defense is to be considered, and it doesn't reference bullying, and it's after disciplinary process has already been started. This amendment that I proposed would stop it from being initiated, if the student exercised it in a reasonable manner. I yield to my colleague.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Earlier today we talked about this, and this section that Representative Aycock talked about, 3701, item 4A, specifically does talk about self defense in that manner. And if you go down, the bill then goes into that section of the code as well. So at the very beginning of the code it covers that issue. And so I think that, you know, with deference to what we're talking about here, you know, Representative Patrick has, you know, gone through and made sure that, you know, I believe it does cover that. And really the most important issue is that it's going to be in the code of conduct for these school districts. So I can tell you from a board member's perspective, and I know Dr.Aycock had the same one, that boards approve those codes of conduct. So we know what goes in those codes of conduct. And so that is going to be taken care of from the self defense thing. So I really think that your -- while I understand what you are suggesting and saying, it has been taken care of and we are adding more to this language than is necessary. And I think it is very permissive in the law that it is today.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: I appreciate that perspective. I don't believe that it is duplicative. I believe that it is helpful and focuses on bullying. And I think this section though, it begins with the code, if you note there it doesn't apply to those other three points above it, only to the fourth point. But if it is duplicative it will not hurt it, will just underscore the importance of it.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Isaac, for what purpose.

REPRESENTATIVE JASON ISAAC: Will the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Simpson, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Yes, I yield to my deskmate.

REPRESENTATIVE JASON ISAAC: It sounds like what's in code right now, what's in statute right now regarding self defense, you could have a student who has defended him or herself and then is expelled or suspended from school while they go through the disciplinary process; is that your understanding?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: I didn't follow all of that. This would apply to someone being -- going through a disciplinary process.

REPRESENTATIVE JASON ISAAC: Correct. And so I believe where in this -- in your particular amendment it will address an issue where a student defends him or herself from someone who is bullying the student, in particular that your amendment would keep them from being suspended or even expelled from school while the disciplinary process works itself out?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: They wouldn't even be going into the disciplinary process if they exercised it reasonably.

REPRESENTATIVE JASON ISAAC: I think the way the statute says right now, I believe that you're going to have the students that get expelled or suspended, they're going to be acquitted through the disciplinary process. I think this is a good amendment. We've seen some videos in light of some bullying that's happened overseas, in Australia, in particular New Zealand, and where a student actually defended himself. And next thing you know they're being lauded as a hero. I think they should be able to defend themselves. I support your amendment. I think we need to move it forward.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Simpson sends up an amendment. Representative Aycock moves to table. This is on the motion to table. Clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Aycock voting aye. Representative Simpson voting no. Have all voted? Showing Representative Marquez voting aye. Showing Representative Hunter voting no. Showing Representative Solomons voting no. Showing Representative Patrick voting aye. Representative Branch voting no. Have all voted? Being 43 ayes, 46 nays; motion to table failed. Representative Simpson sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Simpson.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Simpson.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: I have one more amendment, members, which would just add to the section when they teach children about bullying they would include self defense in response to bullying in that instruction. I believe the amendment is acceptable to the author.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Simpson sends up an amendment. It's acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 1962? Chair recognizes Representative Dutton to speak on the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Than k you Mr. Speaker, members. I chose to speak on this bill. I am actually a proponent of trying to eliminate bullying in schools. But what troubles me about this bill has nothing to do with the bill or the author, but it has to do with the fact that school districts recognize that we have a problem and yet most of them have never done anything about it. And it so they come here an ask us to pass a bill to tell them what to do about bullying in their schools. That makes no sense to me. And yet they will come back tomorrow and say, please, don't tell us to do, we need local control. And, to me, that's absolutely hypocritical for a school district to take that position. And my message is not to you, members, but to all the school districts who recognize that they've got a problem in their school districts, and in their particular schools regarding bullying, but have sat and done absolutely nothing about it, and then they show up here at this Capitol and ask us to do something to stop it. God help us all, if that is the only solution we got for school districts, who recognize they've got a problem at their front door, and they got to wait till they come to Austin to a legislative session to resolve. And it so I hope this says to them and, from you, I hope you'll encourage them that if they have got a problem they need to take care of it. They don't need to come to Austin to get us to do something about it.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: For what purpose?

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Would the gentleman yield for some questions?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Yes, I would be glad to yield.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Representative Dutton, for clarification, you said that you're against stopping of bullying in schools?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: No, I'm against bullying in schools.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Against bullying in schools. Okay. Okay. I told you during -- Do you remember that I told you during our committee hearing on this bill that I like what you to say that if the schools have a problem why don't they fix it?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Right . I don't remember, but thank you for that.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: You bet. And what you say resonates with me. Are you aware, I believe that you are aware, you can confirm that, there is so much hue and cry for local control, as what you've been saying, but this is one of those situations that school administrators are able -- don't you think they are able to identify when they have a bullying problem?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: That 's my whole problem with it. And that's why I was sort of -- at least somewhat challenged by this bill. I had bill about four sessions ago regarding bullying that I carried myself. And it didn't pass. But after the session I thought about it, why am I having to tell school districts who say they have a problem to do something about it? And, actually, I had to go further than that, I had to tell them what to do about it.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: I appreciate you bringing that up, but I will say that Representative Patrick's bill has a great redeeming value in the one part that says now, instead of the the victim of bullying being transferred to another class, now the bully is transferred to another class.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I think there are some great parts of this bill, and I applaud Mrs. Patrick and all the others who got it to this point. My message is more to school districts who I think ought to be aware that look, if you got a problem in your school district and you really want local control, fix it.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Fix it.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Don' t come here and ask us to fix it.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: You know, I agree with you. I intend to vote for the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Oh, I do, too.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Quite frankly, because my biggest school district said they want the legislature to weigh in so that administrators don't feel threatened under the threat of lawsuits to deal with some of these problems. I'm not sure I get that.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, maybe they're being bullied, too.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Well, maybe that's what it is. But you made great points and a great argument. I appreciate you bringing it up, Representative.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And, members, I'm going to vote for this bill, too. I just wanted to speak on it, to send a message to school districts. And I hope they're listening.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1942? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1942. It's a record vote. Record vote has been requested. Record vote is granted. Clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Simpson voting aye. Representative Shelton voting aye. Showing Representative Hardcastle voting aye. Showing Representative Branch voting aye. Have all voted? Showing Representative Murphy voting aye. Have all voted? Being 102 ayes, 34 nays; House Bill 1943 is passed to engrossment. Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I request permission for the Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence to meet while the House is in session at 9:00 p.m. this evening, in room 3W9, to consider pending business.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence will meet at 9:00 p.m. on May the 3rd, 2011, in 3W.9. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business.

JOE STRAUS: Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1992. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1992 by Hardcastle. Relating to the authority of the Texas Animal Health Commission to set and collect fees.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hardcastle.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, if everybody will pay attention for a minute. You know, one of side effects of us passing House Bill 1 was we made some really serious cuts to some really important agencies in this state. President Reagan said that his economic policy rested on the claim that investment in industry would eventually increase revenues but only if left in private hands. And what House Bill 1992 does, members is exactly that. It's seeking to share the responsibility with industry for safety and regulation of the the meat industry in this state.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Geren, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Hardcastle, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Hardcas tle, if this bill doesn't pass what would you recommend that I do with my -- with the steers on my ranch?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Mr. Geren , in all reality if this bill doesn't pass we cut in House Bill 1 and the agency funding 50 percent. And if we don't allow them the process in code right now, they don't have a statute that will allow them to raise fees. And if they're not allowed to raise fees we can't meet the marketing standards, the blood test standards; we can't meet.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: So what would you say that I do to the steers I'm trying to sell?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: I would say you might want to get out of the business in the next few months.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Is the meat industry in support of the this, and do they want to pay these fees; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Every meat industry association is for this, and y'all -- y'all have a letter on your computer saying that they are for it. They have the board members on the board.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: What does this do to the fish industry? Oh, they don't inspect them, they don't care about that. Thank you, Mr. Hardcastle. I think you have a good bill.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Thank you Mr. Geren. The meat inspectors on the Board of Animal Health Commission, so they're involved in making the decision on how much the fees --

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Mr. Speak er?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Christian, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Hardcastle, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Certainly.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Mr. Hardc astle, am I correct that we export a lot of meat from Texas overseas?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Mr. Chris tian, we export more meat than any other state in this nation.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: And what will the failure of this bill do to the possibility of exporting that meat?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Well, the probability, being that you represent a lot of chicken country, one of our leading export partners or trading partners is Russia. But Russia requires that we prove that we don't have certain diseases in our steak, or they won't take the chicken.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Isn't this an inspection of this coding approved, required by almost every nation; if not every nation that imports any meat from any kind from our nation?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: It is required on intrastate, interstate and international trading.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: So the meat industry from the State of Texas is a major agriculture product from our state, will literally or hypothetically or in probability shut down to a large extent, and people will go out of business, if we don't pass this legislation or fund that you're requesting; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: I would not even guess on how quick it would start happening, but a lot of folks in my and your areas live close enough to Oklahoma that we would be raising cattle somewhere else.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Good bill.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Darby, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Hardcastle, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Certainly I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Mr. Hardcastle , is it true that without this cost recovery mechanism for the Animal Health Commission that Texas will be dependent upon the USDA to lead any large scale response or outbreak that will be in disease?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Yes, sir, that is absolutely true.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Is it also true that without this cost recovery mechanism the agency will no longer have inspectors at livestock markets every week, spot checks only at sale barns, cattle, sheep, and horse markets, live bird markets; et cetera?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Yes, sir, that is exactly right.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Is it also true that without this cost recovery mechanism the agency will not be the enforcement of foul, swine disease mitigation programs?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Is it also true that without this cost recovery mechanism the agency will have to drastically reduce the involvement in the fever tick program?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: And that is one of our biggest threats on the southern border, and all of the border delegation understand that threat.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Okay. Is it also true that without this recovery method that the agency will not have an effective ability to respond to newly infected herds or flocks such as Brucellosis or Avian Influenza?

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Yes, sir, that's exactly right.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: As you know, I sat on the Appropriations Committee, and this agency comes under our sub committee in the article, and we had lots of testimony from this (inaudible) and the industry that is they represent about the needs to continue to fund this agency, but they took a 50 percent cost reduction in their budget.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: That's exactly right. And the LBB had the first recommendations that we have some kind of cost recovery mechanism for the agency. They're a small agency, but we need to do this. Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Hardcastle.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hardcastle.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I put in this amendment we set the things they can collect a fee for and we put a Sunset date that will expire September 1st of '13. And it's acceptable to the author.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Hardcastle sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection. Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Miller.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Miller. Amendment is withdrawn. Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Miller.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Mr. Speaker, members, this amendment, these new fees that they're going collect, instead of going to general revenue this amendment would make it a dedicated account intended for that purpose, to be solely used at the Animal Health Commission.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Spea ker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Miller, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Represen tative Miller, why do you feel the necessity for this amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Because we have a habit of -- as you well know, sweeping dedicated funds into the general revenue account.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And you think that's a bad idea?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I think that's a very bad idea, yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: But you know that other fees that are being collected for people that are being swept --

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I know that you're probably very familiar with that. It's a bad practice.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Do you think, though, I mean I like your amendment and I like what you all are doing, would it be unfair to ask for an equal commitment for my rural caucus members and farmers and ranchers to make sure that fees that are collected be spent for their intended purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I'm sure the Rural Caucus would support the Poorboy Caucus on that.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. Because I mean -- I do understand what you-all are doing. I just want us to be all treated the same and --

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I don't disagree with you.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: That's the only reason why I rise -- Anyway, I think I made my point. Thank you, Mr. Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Mr. Speaker, this amendment is acceptable to the author and I move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Mr. Speak er, would the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Yes, I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Thank you, Chairman Miller. Just a quick question: This amendment doesn't necessarily require that the money be spent for the intended purpose; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: It requires that the money collected be placed in a dedicated account for the use or the purpose for which the fee was collected. So, yes, it does.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: So it does place it in a dedicated account, which most fee revenue is, to be used only for the purpose for which the fee was collected. But this amendment doesn't appropriate the funding, and so what I believe the effect is, and it's important for your understanding, also; I suspect that the end result of this amendment is that the money certainly is dedicated for this particular purpose, but it doesn't prevent money from building up a balance in a dedicated account for purposes of certification. So similar to say the sporting goods tax, or rather or the fee collected from let's see, CPAs to pay for scholarships in their fifth year, for students in their fifth year; all that is dedicated but it's just not being spent?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: In the many cases you just indicated, that is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: This amendment doesn't appropriate funds --

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: This amendment says if you collect these fees it goes into a dedicated account, it doesn't go to general revenue --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: And it stays there?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: -- and it's to be spent on what the money was collected for. You are correct, it could accumulate.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Spea ker? Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Miller, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Yes, I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Just for a point of clarification, I understand what you're attempting to do. In order for it to be used for the purpose for which you intended it to be used, you might want to consider on third reading setting this up as a trust account of some kind, because if you set it up as a dedicated account it will still be subject to being swept.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Representative Miller sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Mr. Speaker and members, what this amendment does this -- I want you to understand what this is, this is a pure fee bill. And the way this bill is written it allows them to unlimited -- the Animal Health Commission unlimited to raise fees, there's no cap whatsoever on it. Right now they're authorized to raise fees in three years.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: For what purpose, Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'd like to ask him a question.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Sure.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm looking for a definition. What is the difference in a fee bill and a pure fee bill?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: This one expands it beyond the scope of what they already can raise fees on. This throws the door wide open. Basically, under this legislation, without this amendment they can charge a fee on anything they want. That -- it is not limited. It is unlimited.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So that makes a pure fee bill -- what you mean is that it's just open ended?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And why would we do that to protect meat eaters and not do it for all the other things that we need to have fees for?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Why would we have a pure fee bill to protect the health and safety of meat eaters, when we're not ready to do fee bills to protect the health and safety of everybody else?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Well, I'm with you on that. I don't think we should open this up wide open. I'm not against them having the money they need to operate. They have told me, visiting with the industry, that they need to raise two million dollars to continue to operate. With expansion under this bill they will raise a minimum of 12 million dollars. It will be the agency that adds FTEs and, with the bill as written, they will have a 110 percent of their legislative budget request. It will be the only agency we have that does not only take a cut, but it will be the only agency we have that actually, their budget will increase under this bill.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Did you take a cut at the first of the session?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: They took the cut at the first of the session.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: For every one of us?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: In agreement that they could have these unlimited rights to raise fees.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: But this is a pure fee bill, so this department doesn't have to take a cut?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Actually, you're right.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm asking, I'm not telling.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: If this bill passes as is, they can raise -- their plan is to raise $12 million, which will put them 110 percent over their budget.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So, Chairman Miller, can you appreciate why some people may be a little concerned about the inconsistency? We've been told all session long no more fees, no new taxes, no this, no that, don't adequately fund public education, don't adequately fund nursing homes; but we're going to do a pure fee bill tonight just for a segment of our community?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: This is the largest fee bill they have had on the floor this session.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I believe it's the only fee bill that we have had on the floor this session, isn't it? Did another one slip through?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: We had some earlier.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Have we had fee bills slip through that aren't pure fee bills, and this is a pure fee bill that is about to slip through?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: No. This is a big one.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: This is a big, pure fee bill? Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: What we're going to do with this amendment is limit them to the three areas that they can apply fees now. They will be able to raise the 2 million dollars they need to operate. We're going to eliminate all this expansion of all this other fee areas. I don't think this is acceptable to the author, but I would move its adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hardcastle.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Mr. Speak er, I'm not going to take this amendment because it takes out all of the places in the statute where they can recover a fee, so the two fees that he's leaving in the statute would have to be phenomenal to raise any money. And if you leave the other seven fees in the statute, the bill says the commission can set a fee. And you don't want that fee to be anything bigger than it has to be. And I move to table this amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Miller to close.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Members, I want you to understand what you're voting for if you vote to table this motion. What you're going leave in this bill, it opens it up for the Animal Health Commission to apply fees to anything they want. What my amendment does is it restricts them to the three areas that they can charge fees for now. If we leave it like this they will be allowed to increase their budget to a 110 percent of their legislative request. They need $2 million added to their budget to operate. My amendment would allow them to do that. If we leave this in there they're going to be able to charge fees up, that they say, from their report, $12 million. We just administered the fees, that's going to take four FTEs, and possibly they will expand their FTEs way beyond that.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Mr. Spea ker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Solomons, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: For us who are not in agriculture, farming, ranching, whatever and you're this agency; your amendment is going to limit fees and put them someplace, there's a chance that they are trying to recover costs from the budget crisis?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: That is correct. It allows them to cover what they need, but not an excessive fee.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Right. But all -- I mean I heard the prior member from the back speak, it caught my attention about the fact that the other agencies that we've been dealing with all cut costs as well. So whether you're amendment goes on or not, it's still collecting fees based on the fact that they need more money to operate; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: So all the other agencies that have to cut and make adjudgments because of this budget crisis, they too, if they were smart enough to come with bills, trying to recover those costs through fees, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Right. And there are several of those.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: And there are several of those, too? So all of the agencies, or at least this agency where the bill is before us today, is trying to recover through additional fees the budget cuts that everybody is having to take; including our offices, including all the agencies, including everything? So there's nothing being hidden here, it's pretty much do we want to do this?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: That's correct. I want to make sure that they will be able to collect the money they need. I just don't want them to go beyond.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Right. You're trying to limit it because you feel that they need raise something. But all the agencies have that problem. If we're going to have other bills, we need to all be cognitive of the fact that a lot of agencies are going to look for ways to raise fees.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Many of us in this body, before we came to this legislative session, made the promise that we would not raid the Rainy Day Fund to balance this budget, that we would not raise taxes and we would not raise fees. And this is outrageous, opening it up this wide.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: So when Mr. King on the budget, correct, basically took out all of that out of the budget so that we would individually have a chance to vote on these, is that sort of -- are we sort of doing that?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: This will be up to the will of the House.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: If the House wants to allow it wide open, to charge whatever they want to charge, there's no limit on the amount of fees or the number of fees that they can charge.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Right. But this is the first bill that we're doing that with?

JOE STRAUS: Representative Geren raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Representative Miller sends up an amendment. Representative Hardcastle moves to table. This is the on the motion to table. Clerk will ring the bell. Showing Representative Hardcastle voting aye. Showing Representative Geren voting aye. Showing Representative Miller voting no. Showing Representative Darby voting aye. Representative Hochberg voting aye. Representative Keffer voting aye. Have all voted? There being 61 ayes and 68 nays, the motion to table failed. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Miller.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Mr. Speaker and members, this limits them to the amount of money they need to operate and continue their budget. It says the commission may not collect more than two million dollars in fees under this section during this biennium. And that's what they said they need operate, so we're going to hold them to that with this amendment, so they can't usurp the will of the House. I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Miller sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes -- Following amendment, clerk will read the amendment. The amendment is withdrawn. The Chair recognizes Representative Hardcastle to close.

REPRESENTATIVE RICK HARDCASTLE: Members, I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1992? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1992. For all those in favor say aye, all those in oppose say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 1992 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out, as a matter of postponed business, House Bill 1604. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1604 Guillen. Relating to the regulation of subdivisions in counties, including certain border and economically distressed counties.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen. Mr. Guillen?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to postpone until 9:20.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2232. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2232 by Smith. Relating to the operation, powers, and duties of ship channel districts.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Smith.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Members, Senate Bill is on it's way, so I move that we postpone House Bill 2232 until Thursday, May 5th, 2011, at 9:00 a.m.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2366. Clerk will read the bill. Chair recognizes Representative Hancock.

CLERK: HB2366 by Truitt. Relating to the authority of an open enrollment charter school operated by a municipality to give a preference in admissions to the children of employees of the municipality.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hancock.

REPRESENTATIVE KELLY HANCOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, House Bill 2366 allows children of county employees to enroll in the West Lake Academy without going through the lottery process. Right now, this would be for only five students a year at 520 children currently enrolled. The town wants to see the change so that the law becomes -- so that they can attract new employees to the city. This is a statewide bill.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2366? If not, question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2366. All those in favor say aye, all those oppose nay. The ayes have it, House Bill 2366 passes to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2400. The clerk read the bill.

CLERK: HB2400 by Miller of Comal. Relating to the powers and duties of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and other entities regarding water and sewer utilities and certain conservation and reclamation districts.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE DOUG MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, Representative Turner and I had a discussion about this bill and we're going to have a meeting tomorrow morning. So I would move to postpone HB2400 until a time certain, 10:00 o'clock tomorrow morning, May the -- Wednesday, May the 4th.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2470. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2470 by Phillips. Relating to the regulation of sport bikes.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill relates to passengers on those rocket bikes. It make them required to have certain restrictions on those, such as a hand hold, foot pegs, some basic standard safety. And it's called the Mallory Bill for Mallory, a young lady that lost her life in my hometown. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, this is that amendment by Mr. Raymond that he wanted to clarify the requirements for foot pegs and hand holds for use by passengers on the bike. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Phillips sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Move passage, thank you.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2470? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2470. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2470 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2610. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2610 by Guillen. Relating to the establishment of a community-based navigator program to assist individuals applying or seeking to apply through the Internet for certain public assistance benefits programs.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen. Mr. Guillen?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: I move to postpone HB2610 to Thursday at 10:00 a.m.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2620. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2620 by Hancock. Relating to communications services and markets.

JOE STRAUS: Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 2620 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 980. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB980 by Carona. Relating to communications services and markets.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hancock.

REPRESENTATIVE KELLY HANCOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Senate Bill 980 is the next step between the efforts to modernize the self-communications process. While the mission of the telecommunication market has been competitive and been very successful, 9820 will take it into the next century. Thank you.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 980? Is there an amendment? Sorry. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Hancock.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hancock.

REPRESENTATIVE KELLY HANCOCK: The amendment offers -- clarifies some issues that the committee all had with the agreed upon legislation. It's acceptable to the author.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Hancock sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Hancock.

REPRESENTATIVE KELLY HANCOCK: Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 980? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of Senate Bill 980. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. Senate Bill 980 is passed to engrossment. Representative Hancock moves to lay House Bill 2620 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2671. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2671 by Miles. Relating to the disclosure of personal information under the Motor Vehicle Records Disclosure Act.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Miles.

REPRESENTATIVE BORRIS MILES: Mr. Speaker, members House Bill 2671, Texas Workforce Commission access to the (inaudible) safety of people's driver's license photos and signatures. This will allow for workforce employees to match faces to prevent unemployment fraud. I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2671? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2671. All those in favor say aye, all those oppose, nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 2671 passes to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2761. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2761 by Garza. Relating to the operation of property owners' associations.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: This is a bill that I have worked together with Representative Howard, it's dealing with property owners' associations and open meeting records.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. King, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Just a quick question of the gentleman.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Garza, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Mr. Garza, as I understand this, this is not technically your first bill; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: No, it isn't. I actually had one before this.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: And the one that you had that went through, it went through Local and Consent, did it not?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: I believe so.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: I believe none of us noticed that, did we? And am I correct? Just to verify, you got a free ride?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: I have a what?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: You got a free ride?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: This is actually Mr. Howard's bill.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Oh, okay, so it's his first bill. But I just wanted to verify, we kind of missed you on the first bill, didn't we?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: It was a busy day.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: It was a busy day? Okay. I'll listen while you explain your bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: Yes, sir. Thank you very much.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: You're doing a good job so far, by the way.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: Thank you. This is requiring certain performance by home owners' association. And it's piece of reform legislation that allows open meeting practices, reasonable record keeping, open to access (inaudible) records. It addresses these matters by establishing retirements for property owners' associations to conduct open meetings, adopt document retention policies and provide access to association records. These policies are modeled after the open government acts that these HOA specific versions are located in the property code. So by ensuring open meetings, record retentions and standardized inspections, time-lines, we will achieve uniformity and establish in statute the right of Texas homeowners to open governance of their property owners' association. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Mr. Speaker?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Walle, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Just a few questions, and I know it's his first bill.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Garza, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: I yield to the gentleman. Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Under this bill, Representative Garza, owners may request information or access to the association's -- access to the association's records. Can you describe the new rules that would govern this process?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: That's a serious question. What we're doing is we're requiring HOAs to follow the Texas State Library and Archives Commission Records Retention Schedule. Everything is already set up, so they don't have to invent any new rules. Everything is basically there for them. So --

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And an additional question, this bill includes a requirement that the requesting party must pay for the costs related to the consolation and reproduction of records. Do you think that this disenfranchises property owners with lesser means, who cannot afford these costs?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: I believe we addressed, and not specifically, that there was a -- reproduction of records were at cost.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: What is the fiscal impact of your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: There is no fiscal impact.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Do you think that there are any property owners' associations, or property owners in your district that might object to this bill?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: We have talked to all the stakeholders. They feel that that is needed piece of legislation that basically will cover the problems that we've had with open meetings and with violations in homeowners' associations across the state.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you, Representative Garza.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN V. GARZA: You are welcome. Thank you, sir. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2761? If not, the question occurs on passage of engrossment of House Bill 2761. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2716 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2735. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2735 by Madden.. Relating to procedures for certain persons charged with certain new offenses or an administrative violation of a condition of release from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice on parole or to mandatory supervision.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Madden.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Speaker, members, this is a blue warrant bill. Under current law parole divisions under the Texas Department of Criminal Justice are authorized to issue arrest warrants for parolees who are accused of a violation of their parole, by either technical violation or new arrest. These warrants are known as blue warrants, and the offenders are not eligible for bond. This is a bill that we worked very hard on, worked with TDCJ and many others to make it so that we have a an approved process here. And I would certainly move adoption. And I think Mr. Gallego has question.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Gallego, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Mr. Speak er, would the gentleman yield for a question?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Madden, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Of course, Pete.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: I'm sorry, Chairman Madden. Would you tell me again what you're doing with blue warrant?

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Sure. And what this does, Pete, and it's been very carefully worked out, it allows a person who is -- who has been on parole for over three years, okay, and has had no serious -- no violations, including they have not been an absconder, instead of being given a blue warrant, which they do now, they would be given a summons to appear, so they are not immediately rearrested and put into their county jail. And there's about 550 people this last time, in the last nine months, that this has happened to. So it's a help to your sheriffs, it's a help for many of the populations in our jails, and I know it's very much supported by them, Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: I believe it sounds like it saves money for everybody. And I was kind of confused because I had -- somebody said that it didn't go far enough to help the counties. It seems to me that this goes a significant way to help. That way you're not arresting them and you're not putting them in jail, you're just giving them a summons.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: This helps. I mean, it's not like how it was done last time. It doesn't do it (inaudible). It says they have to be off for three years with no violations. But this is the one that we have carefully crafted so that we make sure that it does some real good. And, as I said, there was about 580 people in the the last nine months that basically this could apply to.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE P. GALLEGO: Thank you, Mr. Madden. I think you have a greet idea.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Thank you, Pete. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2735? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2735. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2735 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2826. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2826 by Murphy. Relating to the issuance of a certificate for a municipal setting designation.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Murphy.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, House Bill 2826 is bracketed to Houston and modifies the process of establishing a municipal setting designation. It would allow any city or well owner to object to the designation and, by doing so, prevent a designation. But their approval would not be required if they would be given 120 days to comment, in notice. With this change we could help the redevelopment of urban areas, provide increased property values and ensure that the public health is protected.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Coleman, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: I'm just blocking the mic.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHY: Yeah, we're just doing the ebony and ivory thing here.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Will the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHY: I would be a happy to yield for a question, Garnet, on a very good bill.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Thank you, Representative Murphy, for bringing this bill. This bill will, as you said, take a lot of properties that will be out of use because of just notification issues, that is clean property, that is good for development; but for notice provisions and that mechanism, it doesn't happen; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHY: That's exactly correct. One of the the things we learned was one of those sites in Houston is where Minute Maid Park is today.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Yes, sir, that's right. And there are other properties along -- in the east part of downtown, east side of downtown. But all over the City of Houston, whether it was a bus barn or site of bad nature where it's clean at the top, and there's no need to pull water from the water table where there may be contamination below us.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHY: We have a great water system and we ought to use that and not drill wells in these contaminated areas. So --

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET F. COLEMAN: Well, thank you. I'm very familiar with this and that's why I signed on the bill with you. You have a very good bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHY: I appreciate your support, Garnet. I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2826? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2826. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2826 passes to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2940. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2940 by King. Relating to the form of death certificates and fetal death certificates.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative King.

REPRESENTATIVE TRACY O. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill is was brought to me by a funeral director in the district and I have carried it for him several sessions. And what it does is -- all it does is require them to when they record the date of death on a death certificate, that they record -- they spell out the month, so that there's no confusion about whether it's the fifth day of the year or the fifth day of the month, for example, on this particular one. And that's the only change that it asks the department to make in the forms for death certificates. I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2940? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2940. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2940 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2963. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2963 by Crownover. Relating to deadlines for the Railroad Commission of Texas to review certain applications for surface coal mining operation permits.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Crownover.

REPRESENTATIVE MYRS CROWNOVER: I move to delay this bill until 8:00 a.m. Friday morning.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 2973. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2973 by Hunter. Relating to encouraging public participation by citizens by protecting a person's right to petition, right of free speech, and right of association from meritless lawsuits arising from actions taken in furtherance of those rights.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is Chairman Hunter's bill that provides for expedited motion to dismiss frivolous lawsuits aimed at retaliating against one who exercises the right of association, free speech or right of petition. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2973? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2973. All in favor say aye, all those opposed, no. The ayes have it. House Bill 2973 passes to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2902. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2902 by Zerwas. Relating to the extraterritorial jurisdiction of certain municipalities.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Zerwas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, HB2902 addresses a local issue in my district involving the ETJ of a small city. And I believe we have one amendment.

JOE STRAUS: Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Martinez.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Martinez. REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO "MANDO" MARTINEZ: T hank you Mr. Speaker. Members, all this amendment does is when they enter into a local agreement with a neighboring city, the overlapping land located in each day of the agreement as followed. I believe it's acceptable to the author.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Martinez sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Zerwas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members, as I mentioned, this bill simply addresses a local issue, it's bracketed and tacked to the City of Weston Lakes in my district. It allows for the automatic release of the the ETJ at the request of more than 80 percent of the owners of the surrounding property. And I move passage, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2902? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2902. All those in favor say aye, those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2902 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2969. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2969 by Oliveira. Relating to authorizing the sale of certain real property held by certain state agencies.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Oliveira.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE O. OLIVEIRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill is a bill that addresses a concern that the governor raised at the beginning of the session, that we should move to sell certain properties that were being under-utilized or not utilized at all. It will raise in excess of a hundred million dollars that would be available for primarily for general revenue, and I would move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Mr. Speake r?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Howard, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Oliveira, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Representa tive Oliveira, doesn't this include the property in Sugarland (inaudible) unit, which we have already decided if TDCJ wanted to close it's a very valuable piece of property, which can bring a lot of money to the State. Isn't that included in your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE RENE O. OLIVEIRA: Yes, it is, Representative Howard. Thank you for bringing it up. That particular property estimated would bring in nearly $18 million, and it's time that it should be sold. And the members of the Criminal Justice Committee and all agree that it should be sold, and it's no longer necessary for us to have that particular facility.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Thank you. You have a good bill.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE O. OLIVEIRA: Thank you very much.

JOE STRAUS: The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Oliveira.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE O. OLIVEIRA: Mr. Spea ker, members, this amendment is simply adding the the simple descriptions of the property, of -- The bill as we passed it out at committee did not have all of the legal descriptions and fee simple descriptions and meets and bounds, and this amendment adds that, a perfecting amendment. And I would move adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Oliveira sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Anchia.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Anchia.

REPRESENTATIVE RAFAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, members. In committee many of us were concerned about how some of the property would be disposed of, so if the School Land Board purchases some of the choice property, they are required to sell it the field bid, and not sell it to -- at an arms-length manner to a private -- to a private purchaser. This ensures that is it is both transparent, and we're getting the maximum value for the property.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Anchia sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Oliveira.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE O. OLIVEIRA: Mr. Spea ker, I move adoption with the bill as amended.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2969? If not, the question occurs on the passage to engrossment of House Bill 2969. All those in favor say aye, those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2969 is passed to engrossment. The Chair recognizes Representative Kolkhorst for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you. I request permission for the Committee on Public Health to meet while the House is in session at 9:45, May 3rd, 2011, in 1W14 to consider pending business.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Raymond for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD PENA RAYMOND: Than k you, Mr. Speaker. Members, the Committee on Human Services will not be meeting tonight after all. I move to suspend the five day posting rule so that the Committee on Human Services will have a public hearing tomorrow morning, May the 4th, 2011, at 8:30 a.m. in room E2.026; to consider SB993, SB221, SB78, SB260, SB434, and SB77.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Public Health will meet at 9:45 p.m, May 3rd, 2011, at 1W.14. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business. The Committee on Human Services will meet at 8:30 a.m. on May 4th, 2011, at E2.036. This will be a public hearing to consider SB993, SB221, SB78, SB260, SB434, and SB77.

JOE STRAUS: Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3096. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3096 by Kolkhorst. Relating to the cancellation of a subdivision by a commissioners court.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members, this is a bill that clarifies the authority of commissioners courts to decide a request from a property owner to remove themselves from a subdivision if a court feels it will negatively impact the development. It's a correction from SB710 from 1999. I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3096? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 3096. All those in favor say aye, those opposed, nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 3096 passes to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3132. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3132 by Geren. Relating to the membership, powers, and duties of the State Preservation Board.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Geren.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Members, I move to postpone until tomorrow, May the 4th, at 10:00 a.m.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair lays out on second reading HB3182. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3182 by Ritter. Relating to the imposition of state taxes, including the sales and use, motor vehicle sales and use, and hotel occupancy tax, on certain oilfield portable units.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Ritter.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, House Bill 3182 is a bill that the oil -- it was brought to me by the oil and gas service industry, and will bring uniformity in the tax rate of portable units to serve our oil and gas industry. And I do have an amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Ritter.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Ritter.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, this is a perfecting amendment that the Comptroller's Office had requested. It adds clarity and creates a bright line of what is an oil field portable unit. And it is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Ritter.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against HB3182? Chair hearing none. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3182 passes to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading HB3573.

CLERK: HB3573 by King of Taylor. Relating to limiting the disclosure of certain information regarding certain charitable organizations, trusts, private foundations and grant-making organizations.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes King of Taylor.

REPRESENTATIVE SUSAN KING: Members, House Bill 3573 is a bill allowing for disclosure protections for certain charitable organizations, charitable trusts and private foundations. We have this bill to allow for these people to support citizens in need when reducing a demand for government provided services. Organizations should have a right of governance to direct where donated money is dispatched. This encourages giving in the private sector by protecting charitable organizations from undue outside

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against HB3573? Question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB3573. All those in favor say aye, those opposed nay. The ayes have it. HB3573 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading HB3311. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3311 by Carter. Relating to the duty of attorney ad litem appointed for a child or an individual with whom the child resides before each court hearing?

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: The Chair recognizes Representative Carter.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this bill relates to the duties of the attorney ad litem appointed for a child to meet with the --

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 3311? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB331. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. HB3311 passes to engrossment. The Chair lays out on second reading HB3395. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3395 by Caligari. Relating to state preferences for recycled products.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Callegari.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Mr. Speake r, members, state agencies are required by law to give preference of purchase toward recycled products, motor oil and other products. They are generally more expensive than other recycled items. As an example, a ream of 100 percent recycled paper costs four dollars, almost twice as much as a ream of non-recycled.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Mrs. Farrar , for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Not now.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: This bill basically changes the statute from requiring the state agencies to give preference to -- from requiring state agencies to purchase recycled products, to make it permissive.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Mrs. Farrar , for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Yes, I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Yes, he yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Callegari, do you know how what the agencies are using recycled products?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: I didn't hear that. I'm sorry.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Do you know, I guess, at what rate state agencies are using recycled products?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: I don't know have specific data on that. No.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I see what you're trying to do. I know that the budget is crunched right now. My concern is that I just don't want to see a reduction in the recycled products industry. So here we are trying to encourage the use of these products but, at that time same time, if we are now reducing the need for these products, I am concerned that the industry will go away at time when it's growing and we want it to grow. And I mean I understand the balance that we are in with the budget.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Well, my response to that is if it costs -- it costs considerably more in come cases to use recycled products, then the industry needs to work harder at reducing the cost of those products. And I think it's important to do that.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I understand that.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: When they understand that they will. When they're required to purchase them there's no incentive to try to reduce the cost.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Certainly, I understand that. And I have got some amendments that deal with that and give a little bit more latitude and discretion in that. But I wanted to know, also I just wanted to point out that the -- make sure that you understood there were other costs, besides the price of the purchase. The cost to landfills. When we are when we are taking something out of the landfills we are reducing a cost there, so I just wanted to make sure that that was clear and that was part of this debate.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: All right.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: All right. I'll bring forward my amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Farrar. Mrs. Speaker, members, what this amendment says is that if the price for the recycled product is within ten percent of the price of the non-recycled product, that it would -- that we would pick the recycled products. It is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Representa tive Farrar sends up an amendment. It is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Caligari.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: I move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against HB3395? Chair hears none. The question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB3395. All those in favor say aye, those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. HB3395 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out HB3468 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3468 by Patrick. Relating to the assessment of public school students for college readiness and development education courses to prepare students for college level course-work.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Patrick.

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: Members, House Bill 3468 aims to improve developmental education in Texas. In Texas, approximately 50 percent of first-year community college students, and 22 percent of first-year university student have enrolled in at least one developmental educational course. Members, I ask for your favorable consideration, and move passage for House Bill 3468.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Representa tive Hochberg, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Would the gentle-lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Does the gentle-lady yield?

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: I certainly do.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: She yields.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you, Representative Patrick. Representative Patrick, you remember in the Appropriations Subcommittee that you served on, we also looked at this topic, and I believed we adopted rider language that pretty specifically gave the coordinating board a requirement that they start funding non-semester length developmental courses and modules. If I remember correctly, no later than the second year of the upcoming biennium. Assuming that we pass a budget and that rider is in it, this bill that you're offering, if it passes in this form, would not conflict with that rider in any way, and would not slow the implementation of what the Appropriations Committee passed; is that your understanding?

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: Thank you for pointing that out. No, it's not intended to slow down any of the Appropriations measures that you have described. But it would, in fact, I think, work very nicely with it, because I think it would allow them to know which are the best practices, and also to encourage the community colleges to offer these differentiated courses, and also to encourage the Higher Ed Coordinating Board to review the funding for that purpose.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you. Thank you, Representative Patrick. Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: I'd like to move that the conversation between Representative Patrick and I would reduced to writing and placed in the journal.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Flynn, is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against HB2468? If not, the Chair recognizes Representative Patrick.

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB3468. All those in favor say aye, those opposed, nay. The ayes have it and HB3468 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading HB3506. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: HB3506 by Villarreal. Relating to the use of transportation allotment funds by school districts to provide bus passes or cards to certain students.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Villarreal.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Mr. Speak er and members, this is a simple bill about cost effectiveness and efficiency. It simply allows school districts to use their transportation allotment from the state to purchase public transportation passes for students. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Is there anyone wishing for or against House Bill 3506? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB3506. All those in favor say aye, those opposed nay. The ayes have it. HB3506 is passed to engrossment. The Chair lays out on second reading HB3665. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3665 by Otto. Relating to state fiscal matters related to general government.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: The Chair recognizes Chairman Otto.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN OTTO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, I move to postpone consideration of House Bill 3665 until tomorrow morning, May 4th, at 8:00 a.m.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there any objection? HB3665 is postponed. Chair lays out on second reading HB3639. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3639 by Pitts. Relating to state fiscal matters relating to public and higher education.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Pitts -- Aycock.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Move to postpone HB3639 until 8:00 a.m. tomorrow morning.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. HB3639 is postponed. Chair lays out on second reading HB3648. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3648 by Otto. Relating to state fiscal matters related to the judiciary.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Otto.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN OTTO: Madam Speaker, I move to postpone consideration of House Bill 3648 until tomorrow morning at 8:00 a.m.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there any objection? HB3648 is postponed until tomorrow at 8:00 a.m. Chair lays out on second reading HB3418. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3418 by Darby. Relating to state fiscal matters relating to natural resources and the environment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Madam Speaker, I move to postpone consideration of House Bill 3418 until tomorrow morning at 8:00 a.m., May 4th.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there any objection? HB3418 is postponed until tomorrow at 8:00 a.m. Chair lays out on second reading HB442. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB442 Guillen. Relating to the establishment of an emergency radio infrastructure account.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, House Bill 442 streamlines the attempts to establish an inter-operable, state wide emergency radio-infrastructure allowing for communications between --

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against HB442? If not the question occurs on passage -- There's an amendment? Representative Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Will you yield, Mr. Guillen?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Represen tative Guillen, tell me what we're doing in 442.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: We're trying to connect law enforcement agencies to law enforcement agencies. We're trying to make sure we connect radio-infrastructure from one law enforcement agency to another, throughout the State.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Is there a fee being imposed, Representative Guillen?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: No. What we're doing is renaming a current -- a current account that has been -- being dormant.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I'm sorry, Ryan, say it one more time.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: We are renaming an account, and renaming it the Intra-operable Statewide Emergency Radio Infrastructure.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: You're renaming some accounts that already exist?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: That are dormant.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: That are dormant? And are there monies going to be going into the account?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: The -- There is -- I have been working with Representative Hartnett on it, and I do have an amendment. What we're doing is we're taking -- this dorm meant account that has been swept and closed down, it happened a couple of months ago. And what we're doing is the fee is already being -- it's still, under current law, being charged and going into this account. And so what we're doing is dedicating it to these few different areas.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And, okay, the fee comes from where?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Court costs.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: But we're not imposing -- we're not imposing any additional fees?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: No.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And we're not raising any additional fees for this?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: We're certainly not. Everything -- That stays the same. I do have an amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: This amendment -- Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this amendment changes what my bill does to address what I've been negotiating with Representative Hartnett. It includes a couple of the causes that is he's wanting to dedicate to, and it is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Representa tive Guillen sends up an amendment. It is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against HB442? Chair recognizes Representative Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB442. All those in favor say aye, those opposed, nay. The ayes have it and HB442 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading HB742. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB742 by Hunter. Relating to student information required to be provided at time of enrollment in public schools.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: This relates to food allergies. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Anyone wishing to speak for or against HB742? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB742. All those in favor say aye, those opposed, nay. The ayes have it and HB742 is passed to engrossment. The Chair lays out on second reading LB1395. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1395 by Parker. Relating to the requirements to operate personal watercraft and certain boats.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Thank you, Mrs. Speaker. Members, House Bill 1395 seeks to adopt the slow (inaudible) approach to mandatory boat operator education in Texas, by instituting the requirement for all operators born after September 1st, 1993. This bill represents the heart and soul of the work performed by the advisory panel on recreation and boating safety. 1395 was carefully written in order to earn the support of all interested parties. I do have one perfecting amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this amendment simply clarifies that a person not old enough to operate a boat on their own, the supervisor must be 18 years of age. It was a drafting error.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Representa tive Parker sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Member, this is a good policy and I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against HB1395? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB1395. All those in favor say aye, those opposed nay. The ayes have it. HB1395 is passed to engrossment. The Chair lays out on second reading HB1629. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1629 by Anchia. Relating to energy efficiency coalitions regarding energy efficiency programs.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Anchia.

REPRESENTATIVE RAFAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, Madam Chair. Members, I move to postpone House Bill 1629 until this Friday at 8:00 a.m.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. HB1629 is postponed until Friday at 8:00 a.m. -- this Friday at 8:00 a.m. Chair lays out on second reading HB2949. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2949 by Cook. Relating to the administration of the collection improvement program.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Cook.

REPRESENTATIVE BYRON COOK: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this moves all the responsibilities to all the cities and counties from CPA to the Office of Court and Administration.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Representa tive Dutton, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I was wondering -- Parliamentary inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: How long are you going to be the speaker tonight?

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Representa tive Dutton?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Coul d you do that again?

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I just wondered, do you know how long we're going to go tonight, Madam Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: We are almost done with the calendar, Representative Dutton.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: So we're going to finish the calendar?

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: I would assume there are three more bills, four more bills.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay . All right. I'll wait.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Thank you, sir. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Cook.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Cook.

REPRESENTATIVE BYRON COOK: This is a perfecting amendment, that it restores financial penalty provision. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Following amendment -- Representative Cook sends up an amendment. It's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Cook.

REPRESENTATIVE BYRON COOK: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB2949. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. HB2949 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading HB2077. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2077 by Rodriguez. Relating to a pilot program under the loanstar revolving loan program to promote the use of energy efficiency measures and renewable energy technology by certain nonprofit organizations.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Strama.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This is a bill that Representative Rodriguez introduced to expand the loanstar program, not to expand the funding for it, but take the existing fund and allow it to be used for worship and nonprofit organizations. And I move passage to engrossment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Farrar. The amendment is withdrawn. Chair recognizes Representative Strama.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK STRAMA: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against HB2077? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB2077. All in favor say aye, those opposed say nay. The ayes have it and HB2077 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading 2663. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2663 by Chisum. Relating to the effect of rules and standards adopted by the Railroad Commission of Texas relating to the liquefied petroleum gas industry on ordinances, orders, or rules adopted by political subdivisions relating to that industry.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Chisum.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Thank you, Mrs. Speaker and members. This just allows the Texas Railroad Commission to set safety standards for the liquid and petroleum gas industry in the State of Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Representa tive Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Will you yield, Mr. Chisum?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Chisum , this bill preempts local ordnances and rules.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: What this does, always in the installations of high pressure gas systems, the Texas Railroad Commission makes those rules; so it -- it's just the installation for safety purposes, where the tanks lay the right direction, where they use high pressure fittings where they need to, and regulators, and keep high pressure gas from going in. So it's just a matter of standards that all of them have to be by, so that we don't have public health -- we don't have incidents of being installed not purposely. They do this already on tanks, and they regulate butane or propane. Dealers in the State of Texas, they regulate the trucks that they go on. They regulate -- they regulate the transportation fuel when it's used as transportation in the storage, and they move large storage outside the city limits. That sort of thing.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: So you're saying, I just want to make sure that this preempts what local ordnances all ready do.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Well, it has a standardized -- safety standard that would be applicable across the State of Texas. But inside the city, on the distribution lines, they could do that. But this is just setting up standard safety programs so that no municipality goes left in them.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. But can they go more?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: I suppose they could go more. It doesn't say they -- We just set up a safety standard and they have to at least meet the safety standards.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. Because I have an amendment that would allow them to go more local, if they want to go more. All right?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Chair recognizes Representative Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mrs. Speak er, members, if the purpose of regulating liquified petroleum gas is to protect health, welfare and safety, then local government should be free to enact more stringent regulations than those imposed by the state. This amendment limits preemptions to situations in which local ordnances are not more protective of health, welfare and safety of the general public.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Representa tive Farrar sends up an amendment. It is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hearing none. The amendment is adopted. Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against HB2663? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of HB -- Chair recognizes Representative Chisum. I apologize.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Question occurs on passage of HB2663 to engrossment. All those in favor say aye, those opposed nay. The ayes have it and HB2663 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading HB3346. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB3346 by Burnam. Relating to certain information available to the public on a central database, containing information about sex offenders.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill is so good that Representatives Hartnett, Christian and Zedler signed onto it. It allows DPS to return to the record management procedure that they have followed for 20 years. Before that there was interference by the media. I move this adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 3346? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 3346. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. HB3346 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading HB2599. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB2599 by Ritter. Relating to the definition of chewing tobacco for purposes of the taxes imposed on cigars and other tobacco products, and to the rate of the tax imposed on chewing tobacco.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Ritter.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, House Bill 2599 will bring back fairness to the way we are taxing some of our tobacco products and I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2599? If not, the question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2599. All those in favor say aye, all those against say nay. The aye's have it, House Bill 2599 is passed to engrossment. Chair recognizes Representative Hunter for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, members, on Friday we have the emergency items sanctuary cities theft. The Calendar Committee has a calendar rule, so I am going to move for a calendar rule. Mr. Speaker, members, I move that each original amendment to Committee Substitute of HB12 that will be offered during the second reading consideration, must be filed with the Chief Clerk not later than 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, May 5th, 2011. So the bill is on the calendar for Friday. You would have a 10:00 a.m. cut off, Thursday, for amendments.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? The Chair hears -- A record vote has been requested. The clerk will ring the bell. It's on the calendar rule. Have all voted? Being 131 ayes and 1 nay, the calendar rule is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Pickett for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I'd like to suspend all the following rules, the posting rules, five day posting rule, necessary rules for the Committee on Veterans Affairs to consider SB431, SB461, SB966, SB1477, SB1660, SB1739, SB1755, SB1756 and SB1796 at 8:00 a.m. in May 6th, in 5E2.012.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Announcement, the clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Veterans Affairs will meet at 8:00 am on May 6th, 2011, at E2.012. This will be a public hearing to consider SB366, SB431, SB461, SB966, SB1466, SB1660, SB1739, SB1755, SB1766, SB1796 and pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business HB 1604. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB1604 by Guillen. Relating to the regulation of subdivisions in counties including certain border and economically distressed counties.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I move to postpone HB1604 until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow, May 4th, 2011.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there objection? The chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move to suspend all necessary rules and the five day posting rule so that the Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence can consider House Bill 2433 at the next regular meeting, which is scheduled for today in Reagan Room 120.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Mr. Speaker, this is an announcement that the meeting that we had scheduled for Criminal Jurisprudence tonight in Reagan Room 120 is being canceled.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Members, I move to suspend the following rules, the five day posting rule, to allow the Committee on Higher Education to consider HB2517 and the previously posted agenda and pending business, tomorrow morning at 8:30 a.m., May the 4th, 2011, at E1.014.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Guillen for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move to suspend the five day posting rule to allow the Committee on Culture, Recreation and Tourism to consider SB158 -- SB1518 at 2:00 o'clock p.m, or upon adjournment or recess, on May 4th, 2011, at E1.026.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. Following announcements, clerk will read the announcements.

CLERK: The Committee on Higher Education will meet at 8:30 a.m. on May 4th, 2011, at E1.014. This will be a public hearing to consider HB2517, previously posted agenda and pending business. The Committee on Culture, Recreation and Tourism will meet at 2:00 p.m., or upon adjournment or recess, on May 4th, 2011, at E1.026. This will be a public hearing to consider SB1518 and previously posted agenda.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I move to suspend all necessary rules to request permission to add Warren Chisum and Joe Paxton as joint sponsors of SB257. I would move for permission.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Madden.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Speaker and members, the House Committee on Corrections will have our picture taken at 10:30 tomorrow morning, back in the conference room.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The Chair recognizes Representative Zerwas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move to suspend the five day posting rule so the Committee on Public Health can consider HB415.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you have heard the motion. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair recognizes Representative Geren.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I'd like to suspend all necessary rules so that the Committee on Public Health -- excuse me, for the Committee on Public Health to consider HB415 at 8:00 a.m. on 5/4/11 in E2.012. And it is signed by Zerwas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. Following announcement. Clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Public Health will meet at 8:00 a.m. on May 4th, 2011, at E2.012. This will be a public hearing to consider previously posted agenda and HB415.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Ritter.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Members, I move to recommit SB660 back to the House Natural Resources Committee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. Are there any other announcements? If not, Representative Ritter moves that the House stand adjourned pending the reading and referral of bills and resolutions until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow. The House stands adjourned. Following bills on first reading and referral:

CLERK: HB3864 by Gooden. Relating to the creation of the Lazy W District No. 1; providing authority to impose a tax and issue bonds; granting a limited power of eminent domain. HR1425 by Hughes. In memory of Richard Wayne Napier of Mineola. HR1440 by Workman. Congratulating John P. Reinhart of Cub Scout Pack No. 34 in Austin on receiving the Arrow of Light Award. HR1441 by Anchia. Congratulating Amy Lillian Ward-Meier and Edward Franklin Meier on the birth of their son, Nolan Edward Meier. HR1442 by Hartnett. Commending the Service Learning Adventures in North Texas 45 initiative for promoting community service among young people. HR1444 by Harper-Brown. In memory of Giorgio Joseph Primo of Irving. HR1445 by Harper-Brown. Congratulating Edgar and Elizabeth Brown of Dallas on their 70th wedding anniversary. HR1447 by Schwertner. Congratulating the Artie Henry Middle School band on earning the 2010 Sudler Cup. HR1448 by Craddick. Congratulating nominees for the 2011 Excellence in Teaching and Unsung Hero Awards, sponsored by the Midland Chamber of Commerce Education Committee. HR1449 by Craddick. Congratulating Roy and Marylyn Byrd of Lamesa on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR1450 by Hilderbran. In memory of Ross Snodgrass of Kerrville. HR1451 by Hildebran. In memory of George Milton Keller of Mason. HR1452 by Menendez. Honoring Stewart Title in San Antonio on the 100th anniversary of its founding. HR1453 by Bonnen. Commending Army Specialist Brad Thomas of Jones Creek on his military service and congratulating him on becoming the first baseball player from Brazosport High School to have his jersey retired. HR1454 by Perry. Congratulating Delbert and Carolyn McDougal of Lubbock on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR1455 by Raymond. In memory of Reynaldo Chapa, Jr., of Benavides. HR1456 by Hardcastle. Commemorating the 128th Doans May Day Picnic on May 7, 2011. HR1457 by Howard of Travis. Congratulating Austin Wayne Self on his victory in the opening event of the 2011 NASCAR Texas Super Racing Series. HR1459 by Branch. In memory of Robert Leland Shaw, Jr., of Dallas. HR1460 by Branch. Commemorating the 100th anniversary of the Sons of Hermann Hall in Dallas. HR1461 by Branch. In memory of Roy Richard Rubottom, Jr. HR1466 by Naishtat. Honoring the Texas Teen Safe Driving Coalition, commemorating May as National Youth Traffic Safety Month, and recognizing May 16, 2011, as Texas Teen Safe Driving Day. HR1464 by Pitts. In memory of James Rutledge Mason of Waxahachie. HR1465 by Hamilton. Recognizing National Plumbers Day on April 25, 2011. HR1485 by Solomons. Recognizing November 5-9, 2012, as Municipal Courts Week in Texas. HR1585 by Harper-Brown. Honoring Suzie Oelschlegel, head coach of the girls' basketball team at MacArthur High School in Irving. HR1586 by Truitt. Congratulating Bernice Hatcher of Grapevine on her 100th birthday. HR1587 by Schwertner. In memory of Marilyn Stiles Shoemaker. HR1588 by Schwertner. Congratulating the girls' cross country team from C. H. Yoe High School in Cameron on its second-place finish in Class 2A at the 2010 UIL state meet. HR1589 by Johnson. Commending Carl Johnson for serving as a Democratic Party precinct chair in Dallas County. HR1590 by Johnson. Commending Carl Johnson for serving as a Democratic Party precinct chair in Dallas County. HR1591 by Johnson. Commending Morris Luster for serving as a Democratic Party precinct chair in Dallas County. HR1592 by Johnson. Commending Neil Emmons for serving as a Democratic Party precinct chair in Dallas County. HR1593 by Johnson. Commending Marilynn S. Mayse for serving as a Democratic Party precinct chair in Dallas County. HR1594 by Johnson. Commending Deborah C. Culberson for serving as a Democratic Party precinct chair in Dallas County. HR1595 by Johnson. Commending Patrick McCrainey for serving as a Democratic Party precinct chair in Dallas County. HR1596 by Johnson. Commending Casie Pierce for serving as a Democratic Party precinct chair in Dallas County. HR1597 by Johnson. Commending Tommy Briggs for serving as a Democratic Party precinct chair in Dallas County. HR1598 by Johnson. Commending Damion White for serving as a Democratic Party precinct chair in Dallas County. HR1599 by Howard of Travis. Honoring Dr. James E. Boggs of Austin on his 90th birthday. HR1600 by Howard of Travis. Recognizing the third full week of May 2011 as Neuropathy Awareness Week. HR1601 by Flynn. Congratulating Hubert and Phyllis Lytle of Greenville on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR1602 by Hildebran. Recognizing J. Michael Duncan for his service as Knight Commander of Kappa Alpha Order. HR1603 by Hildebran. Commemorating the opening of Trent's Retreat. HR1604 by Lavender. In memory of June Hodges of Omaha, Texas. HR1605 by Huberty. Welcoming members of the Northeast Christian Academy community to the State Capitol on May 16, 2011. HR1606 by Morrison. Honoring Bette-jo Simpson Buhler of Victoria on her 90th birthday. HR1607 by Anchia. Commemorating the 75th anniversary of the construction of the Texas Centennial Exposition's "Home for the Future" in Dallas. HR1608 by Anchia. In memory of Evelyn Rhodes Witte Sterling of Dallas. HR1609 by Anchia. In memory of William Sanders Barnhill, Jr., of Dallas. HR1610 by Anchia. In memory of Isaac Field Roebuck, Jr., of Dallas. HR1611 by Anchia. In memory of Irwin Ira Steinberg of Irving. HR1612 by Anchia. In memory of Ruth Christine Howes of Dallas. HR1613 by Menendez. Congratulating the San Antonio Water System on winning a Texas Environmental Excellence Award. HR1614 by Pena. In memory of Benigno "Benny" Layton of Elsa. HR1616 by Gooden. Honoring Chase Beavers of Terrell High School for his achievements as the 2010-2011 governor of the Texas-Oklahoma District of Key Club International. HR1617 by Gooden. Congratulating the North Texas Municipal Water District on its receipt of the 2011 Texas Environmental Excellence Award for water conservation. HR1618 by Murphy. Honoring Steve Dorman of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 130 in Harris County. HR1619 by Murphy. Honoring Bob Blackmer of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 338 in Harris County. HR1620 by Murphy. Honoring Larry Pound of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 356 in Harris County. HR1621 by Murphy. Honoring Warren Stevens of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 429 in Harris County. HR1622 by Murphy. Honoring Roman Klein of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 437 in Harris County. HR1623 by Murphy. Honoring Craig Hagedorn of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 438 in Harris County. HR1624 by Murphy. Honoring Mary Maxwell of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 483 in Harris County. HR1625 by Murphy. Honoring Stephen Sherman of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 487 in Harris County. HR1626 by Murphy. Honoring Stuart Mayper of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 492 in Harris County. HR1627 by Murphy. Honoring Martha Brownfield of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 493 in Harris County. HR1628 by Murphy. Honoring Ralph Fite of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 499 in Harris County. HR1629 by Murphy. Honoring Shelley Hillman of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 504 in Harris County. HR1630 by Murphy. Honoring Samuel Abraham Mai of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 508 in Harris County. HR1631 by Murphy. Honoring Helen Bledsoe of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 626 in Harris County. HR1632 by Murphy. Honoring Jim McSpadden of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 727 in Harris County. HR1633 by Murphy. Honoring Jill Fury of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct chair of Precinct 765 in Harris County. HR1634 by Torres. Honoring Angel Escobar on his retirement as city manager of Corpus Christi. HR1636 by Burkett. Congratulating Mary Marlow Woodard on her receipt of the Distinguished Library Service Award from the Texas Association of School Librarians and on being named chair-elect of the association. HR1637 by Kolkhorst. Congratulating the Brenham Christian Academy football team on winning the 2010 TAPPS Six-man Division II state championship. HR1638 by Margo. Congratulating Ida M. Steadman on her retirement as principal cellist of the El Paso Symphony Orchestra. HR1639 by Margo. Congratulating the El Paso Symphony Orchestra on its 80th anniversary season. HR1640 by Miller. Welcoming Larry D. Williams, vice president and director of State Auto Insurance Companies, to Texas. HR1641 by Taylor. Honoring Bay Area Charter Schools and welcoming a delegation from Ed White Memorial High School in League City to the State Capitol on May 4, 2011. HR1642 by Veasey. Congratulating James N. Austin, Jr., of Fort Worth on the occasion of his 60th birthday. HR1643 by Deshotel. Honoring the Texas Small Farmers and Ranchers Community Based Organization. HR1644 by Callegari. Congratulating Emory Camille Callegari on her graduation from St. Michael's Catholic Academy. HR1645 by Callegari. Honoring the Galveston Company of the Houston Medical Response Group of the Texas State Guard on its activation as the Galveston Medical Response Group. HR1646 by Harper-Brown. In memory of Mildred B. Brandon of Irving. HR1648 by Cain. Congratulating Nigel Christopher of Mount Pleasant on his selection as the 2011 Titus County Republican of the Year. HR1649 by Cain. Welcoming members of the Sulphur Springs Chamber of Commerce Adult Leadership Class to the State Capitol. HR1650 by Cain. Congratulating Tony Mize of Mount Pleasant on receiving the Chairman's Award for Special Service from the Titus County Republican Party. HR1651 by Anderson. Honoring senior pastor Barry Camp and his wife, Martha, for 20 years of outstanding service to Highland Baptist Church in Waco. HR1652 by Flynn. Congratulating Charles and Rachel Recer of Emory on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR1653 by Flynn. Congratulating James Louis and Mary Jean Pickney of Wills Point on their 67th wedding anniversary. HR1655 by Woolley. In memory of William Arnold McMinn, Jr., of Houston. HR1657 by Hopson. In memory of Lafonda Ann Davis of Austin. HR1658 by Davis. Honoring Dr. Larry R. Kaiser for his service as president of The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston. HR1660 by Straus. Expressing the importance of pedestrian safety and driver awareness and welcoming the American Council of the Blind to the Capitol. HR1661 by Workman. Welcoming the members of the Rotary District 5870 and Rotary District 1650 Group Study Exchange program to the State Capitol. HR1664 by Harper-Brown. Congratulating the City of Irving for its notable 2011 record of achievements. HR1665 by Harper-Brown. In memory of James Edward Rose of Irving. HR1666 by Harper-Brown. Congratulating Amanda Lambert of Irving on receiving a 2011 Yes I Can! Award from the Council for Exceptional Children. HR1667 by Harper-Brown. Congratulating Irving Cares on receiving a four-star rating from Charity Navigator. HR1668 by Branch. Recognizing Jonathan Neerman for his service as chair of the Dallas County Republican Party. HR1671 by Gallego. Commending Roberto "Bobby" Barrera of Del Rio, chair of the Disabled American Veterans. HR1672 by Gallego. In memory of Johnny Emil Malik of Alpine. HR1673 by Gallego. In memory of John Frank "Trey" Woodward III. HR1674 by Gallego. In memory of Thelma R. Hoyle of Alpine. HR1675 by Gallego. Recognizing May 6, 2011, as Lucy Rede Franco Day. HR1676 by Gonzales. Congratulating the students from Memorial High School in McAllen who were named to the 2010-2011 Texas High School Coaches Association 5A Academic All-State Football Team. HR1677 by Gonzales. Commemorating the 2011 Hispanic Heritage Fiesta in Mercedes. HR1678 by Gonzales. Congratulating South Texas College president Dr. Shirley A. Reed on her receipt of the 2011 Alfredo G. de los Santos, Jr., Distinguished Leadership in Higher Education Award from the American Association of Hispanics in Higher Education. HR1679 by Munoz. Recognizing May 2011 as Older Americans Month and honoring the Silver Ribbon Community Partners. HR1680 by Munoz. Congratulating Lazaro "Larry" Gallardo, Jr., of Hidalgo County on being named the 2010 Constable of the Year by the National Constables Association. HR1681 by Gonzales. Honoring Maria Luisa "Tita" Yanar of El Paso for her contributions as an educator and civic leader. HR1683 by Hunter. In memory of Ricardo G. "Richard" Alvarado of Alice. HR1685 by Woolley. Commemorating the dedication of the Herbert Gee Municipal Courts Building in Houston and paying tribute to the life of Judge Gee. HR1686 by Frullo. Congratulating George and Lucille Kveton of Lubbock on their 60th wedding anniversary. HR1687 by Frullo. Congratulating the Reverend Emmitt Clampitt and Barbara Clampitt of Lubbock on their 60th wedding anniversary. HR1688 by Frullo. Congratulating Douglas and Angela Boren of Lubbock on their 60th wedding anniversary. HR1689 by Frullo. In memory of Bobby Gene Brown of Lubbock. HR1690 by Frullo. Congratulating radio station KFYO of Lubbock on its 85th anniversary. HR1691 by Frullo. Congratulating Alvin and Glenda Burton of Lubbock on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR1692 by Menendez. Honoring Dolores Mendez for her contributions to the San Antonio community. HR1693 by Schwertner. Honoring Mary Lopez Dale on running the 115th Boston Marathon on April 18, 2011. HR1695 by Reynolds. Honoring Cynthia Bennett, president and founder of the Sienna and East Fort Bend Democrats Club. HR1696 by Reynolds. Congratulating Velma Brown on her election to the board of the Sienna and East Fort Bend Democrats Club. HR1697 by Reynolds. Congratulating Stephanie Green on her election as secretary of the board of the Sienna and East Fort Bend Democrats Club. HR1698 by Reynolds. Congratulating Shania Wright on her election as treasurer of the board of the Sienna and East Fort Bend Democrats Club. HR1699 by Reynolds. Commemorating the 2011 Missouri City Juneteenth Celebration. HR1700 by Dutton. Congratulating the 2011 eighth-grade graduates of Northwest Preparatory Academy Charter School in Houston. HR1702 by Alonzo. Recognizing the 2011 Oak Cliff Coalition for the Arts Cinco de Mayo parade and street festival. HR1703 by Anderson. Congratulating Ryan Fite on his receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR1704 by Anderson. Congratulating Robert Jackson on his receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR1705 by Anderson. Congratulating Alan Tuberville on his receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR1706 by Anderson. Congratulating Nash Tuberville on his receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR1707 by Anderson. Congratulating Hannah Powers on her receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR1708 by Anderson. Congratulating Kate Harrison on her receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR1709 by Anderson. Congratulating Delmond and Diane Rosenkranz of Robinson on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR1710 by Anderson. In memory of Julia Hikel of Elm Mott. HR1711 by Anderson. Congratulating Kollin Kahler of Waco on making the president's list at Lamar University. HR1712 by Anderson. In memory of Cyril W. Cernosek of West. HR1713 by Anderson. In memory of Joy Allen Oliver of Lorena. HR1714 by Anderson. Congratulating the students of Lorena Middle School for raising more than $2,000 in the Pennies for Patients campaign benefiting the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. HR1715 by Anderson. Congratulating the all-district athletic and academic honorees from the West High School boys' basketball team. HR1716 by Anderson. In memory of Vernon W. Sloane. HR1717 by Anderson In memory of Betty Jean Slater of Riesel. HB1718 by Anderson. Congratulating the Waco ISD purchasing department on its receipt of a Texas Association of School Business Officials Award of Merit for Purchasing and Operations. HR1719 by Anderson. Congratulating Gene Manske on being named a 2010 Outstanding Farmer. HR1720 by Anderson. In memory of Victor D. "Bud" Wiley, Jr., of Waco. HR1721 by Anderson. In memory of Milton Roy Overgoner of Belton. HR1722 by Anderson. In memory of Mary Ruth Galloway of Waco. HR1723 by Anderson. In memory of Mary Helen Torres of Waco. HR1724 by Anderson. Congratulating Clarence and Charlotte Carpenter of Waco on their 60th wedding anniversary. HR1725 by Anderson. In memory of Donna L. Carey of Robinson. HR1726 by Anderson. In memory of Clara Samuelson of Waco. HR1727 by Anderson. In memory of Olivia Tucker Cloud of Waco. SB63 by Zaffirini. Relating to the creation of the individual development account program to provide savings incentives and opportunities for certain foster children to pursue home ownership, postsecondary education, and business development. SB462 by West. Relating to the expunction of records and files relating to a person's arrest. SB687 by Huffman. Relating to interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications for law enforcement purposes. SB730 by Nichols. Relating to the conversion of a nontolled state highway or segment of the state highway system to a toll project. SB1070 by Jackson. Relating to the composition of the permanent advisory committee to advise the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regarding the implementation of the ad valorem tax exemption for pollution control property. SB1206 by Deuell. Relating to medical care and public health services provided by a health care professional in a licensed freestanding emergency medical care facility. SB1237 by Williams. Relating to persons authorized to access or use electronically readable information derived from a driver's license, commercial driver's license, or personal identification certificate. SB1399 by Patrick. Relating to the regulation of foundation repair contractors; providing penalties. SB1557 by Carona. Relating to the Texas High Performance Schools Consortium. SB1864 by Davis. Relating to the awarding of contracts by the Texas Department of Transportation to private sector providers. SB1899 by Nichols. Relating to compensation for services and reimbursement for expenses of a member of the board of directors of the Lake View Management and Development District. SCR50 by Watson. Congratulating Bobby R. Inman for receiving the Joe M. Kilgore Award for Public Service.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: The House stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning.

(The House stands adjourned.)