KTBB News, Weather, Talk

HOUSTON – The Houston Chronicle reports that Land Commissioner Dawn Buckingham has penned a letter to federal law enforcement officials encouraging them to reject “unsubstantiated findings” submitted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development that accuse the Texas General Land Office of mishandling Houston’s Harvey flood mitigation dollars. HUD escalated a complaint to the U.S. Department of Justice last week, claiming state officials had violated the Fair Housing Act by discriminating against the city’s Black and Hispanic residents by creating an unfair competition for disaster relief funds. The federal agency found that the land office had “intentionally discriminated based on race” by creating a competition to allocate funds “that steered money away from Black and Hispanic communities that had the highest storm and flood risk into whiter, more rural areas with less risk.” That competition resulted in no funds set aside for Houston or Harris County.

HUD had originally upheld its discrimination ruling in 2022, but the Justice Department said it would hold off on considering the matter until HUD completed its investigation. Since making that initial finding, HUD said it obtained more information that showed state officials had intentionally allocated mitigation funds in a way the agency knew would disadvantage minority communities. Buckingham, in a Thursday news release, said that the Biden administration had lost its “bully pulpit it used for political stunts like this” as President Donald Trump took office Monday, and she called on the Justice Department to refer to the claim as “fake news.” Trump’s new Justice Department leadership has said the agency would not take on any new civil rights cases until further notice, the Associated Press revealed yesterday. Buckingham also said HUD failed to meet a burden of proof surrounding the claims. She said the federal agency worked with the land office to formulate a plan for distributing funds and that HUD had said funds couldn’t be awarded based on damage from the storm alone.

DALLAS – The Dallas Morning News reports that four military police units from Texas are among as many as 1,500 active-duty troops bound for the nation’s southern border to “bolster security,” military leaders said Friday. The movement, announced by the U.S. Northern Command, stems from executive orders signed by President Donald Trump during his first week in office aimed at cracking down on immigration. The command oversees military operations across North America. Those activated in Texas include three units from Fort Cavazos, near Killeen, and one from Fort Bliss, near El Paso. A command spokesperson declined to provide additional information about troop movements.

Those deployed, which includes units from the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marine Corps, will join the nearly 2,500 service members already supporting U.S. Customs and Border Protection personnel overseeing the nearly 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border. The additional troops will enhance ”detection and monitoring efforts” and maintain physical barriers. The command has begun a 30-day planning effort to stand up a “multi-domain, and likely multi-component” response, military officials said Thursday in a news release. The total number of troops on the mission may change as units rotate personnel and additional forces may be deployed at a later date, the announcement says.

SAN ANTONIO – The San Antonio Express-News reports that a federal rule designed to “crack down on loopholes” in an anti-cruelty law protecting horses has drawn the ire of Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, who called it “government overreach at its worst” during a Friday interview with KXAN. “I’m horse shower. I’m rodeo guy,” he said. “Before I go, I have to take my horses to vet and get a health certificate. They’ve already been inspected. So what this does is way too far.” The rule targets “soring,” the use of devices or substances to inflict pain on a horse’s foreleg to cause the animal to do a “high-stepping running walk.” While the 1970 Horse Protection Act banned the practice, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) said it created this new enforcement rule to close loopholes in the law. APHIS, following a White House directive to postpone all pending rules, announced Friday it will postpone implantation of the rule until April 2. The rule was previously scheduled to go into effect on Feb. 1.

SAN ANTONIO The San Antonio Express-News reports a SpaceX proposal to launch more of its giant rockets from South Texas may be in for a rough ride after last week’s spectacular disintegration of a Starship over the Caribbean. Opposition to the proposal, which calls for 25 Starship launches a year — and landings in the Pacific Ocean around Hawaii — is increasingly coming from outside Texas. Now, Hawaiians who don’t like the idea of SpaceX dropping Starship rockets into the Pacific Ocean around the islands have jumped into the debate. On Jan. 13, three days before Starship’s seventh test flight ended with Starship’s fiery breakup, the Federal Aviation Administration conducted an online public hearing at which dozens of people spoke out against the proposal. Several supporters also chimed in. Among 40 participants were at least 19 islanders who spoke against the plans.

Their comments will join thousands of written statements submitted to the FAA since July. It could approve the proposal, ask for changes or require a full environmental impact statement — a lengthy process that could cause significant delays for SpaceX. The meeting kicked off with nearly 250 written comments. After the meeting and Starship explosion, the FAA received thousands more. By the time the agency closed submissions, the total had ballooned to 7,130, nearly 7,000 of which came in the past week. More than 60 state and local elected officials signed letters of support for the increase, Kathy Lueders, Starbase’s general manager, said on X. Most of those who spoke Jan. 13 called for the FAA to perform a full impact statement. They cited concerns about the cumulative impacts of Starship operations in South Texas, including noise, vibration, sonic booms, possible explosions, water and air pollution and increasing traffic.They also blasted the FAA’s existing environmental reviews of SpaceX’s rapidly evolving program at Starbase.

AUSTIN – The Texas Tribune reports that the Texas Senate revealed a bill on Friday to create an education savings accounts program, a top priority for Gov. Greg Abbott and top lawmakers after a similar bill failed to pass last legislative session.

The bill, co-authored by Sen. Brandon Creighton, a Republican from Conroe who chairs the Senate Education Committee, would provide families with $10,000 a year per student in taxpayer dollars to fund their children’s tuition at an accredited private school and additional expenses like textbooks, transportation and therapy. The legislation would provide $11,500 per student for children with disabilities. It also would provide at least $2,000 a year per student for home-schooling families who participate in the program.

“Texas families are rejecting the status quo and calling for an education system that prioritizes their children’s success. Senate Bill 2 places parents at the center of their child’s education, empowering them with the freedom to choose the educational path that works best for their families,” Creighton said in a statement.

School vouchers, also referred to as “school choice” programs, use taxpayer money to help families pay for their children’s private schooling. Education savings accounts are a voucher-like program that allows families to draw funds from a state-managed account to pay for private school tuition and other education-related expenses.

Lorenzo G Alarcon Elementary School received Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds to create a calming and quiet room with the school counselor in San Elizario, Texas on July 23, 2024.
Related Story

Any child eligible to attend or already attending a public school could apply to the program proposed by the Senate, as well as those enrolled in a public school’s pre-K program. Families with children already attending private schools could also participate. Gov. Greg Abbott, the state’s top school voucher advocate, has previously called for any voucher proposal to have universal eligibility, which generally means that any student can apply. The bill would prioritize students in low-income households and children with disabilities if demand for the savings accounts exceeds the funding available.

Organizations helping administer the program would have to notify parents that private schools do not have to follow federal and state laws regarding special education that public schools must abide by, such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA.

The bill also has a provision to address potential misuse of funds. It directs the state to refer to local authorities any organizations or individuals helping administer the program or participating in it who use the funds in ways not allowed. Approved expenses include private school tuition, training for an industry-based certification, tutoring and instructional materials.

The bill does not require participants to take the same state standardized tests issued to public school students annually, which some voucher opponents and school officials have said creates an unfair playing field. It does require that students take a nationally-recognized exam.

The Senate Education Committee will hold a public hearing for the proposal on Tuesday.

The bill arrives during the same week that both the House and Senate released their budget priorities for the 2025 legislative session. Both chambers proposed setting aside $1 billion in the next two years to create education savings accounts — a $500 million increase from what lawmakers proposed for such a program during the 2023 legislative session.

Under Friday’s proposal, that would mean roughly up to 100,000 students who want to enroll into an accredited private school could participate in the program. Texas public schools currently enroll about 5.5 million children.

Mandy Drogin, a campaign director with the Texas Public Policy Foundation, one of the state’s leading conservative organizations pushing for education savings accounts, told The Texas Tribune that the Senate bill would create the largest education savings account program in the U.S.

“Additionally, the universal eligibility would ensure that no children are left out and every single parent will have the opportunity to make educational choices for their children,” she said in a statement.

Chandra Villanueva, director of policy and advocacy at Every Texan, which opposes vouchers, said she doesn’t think the bill’s prioritizing of low-income students or children with disabilities if demand for the program exceeds funding will have that much of an impact.

“Most low-income families won’t be able to afford the tuition gap for a private school, or they’ll be sending their kids to a lower quality school because they market themselves as private but don’t really offer anything above and beyond what a public education would,” she said.

Villanueva added she doesn’t think the bill will help special education students much either, given a relatively small number of private schools in the state specializing in serving students with disabilities.

David DeMatthews, an education professor at the University of Texas at Austin, called it “absurd” that the proposal allows private schools to ignore federal and state protections that ensure children with disabilities receive proper evaluations and educational services.

“I think this is an example of the creation of an education market that is not for everybody,” DeMatthews said. “Because you’re asking parents to waive protections that are solidified in federal law. There’s going to be parents who are not willing to do that.”

Meanwhile, Jeremy Newman, vice president of policy with the Texas Home School Coalition, said the education savings account bill proposed Friday was “pretty close to what we expected.”

“Home school families would be able to use it, and I think it would be extremely useful for them,” Newman said, adding that his organization plans to support the legislation during the public hearing set for Tuesday. “I’m fairly hopeful that we’ll get something similar in the House.”

After years of hitting a brick wall, school voucher advocates in Texas entered this year’s legislative session with better odds than ever of passing a measure that would let parents use public money to pay for their kids’ private schooling. The Senate has largely stood in lockstep with Abbott as he has pushed for a voucher program.

The House remains the bigger challenge.

Last session, lawmakers in that chamber voted to strip from a massive education funding bill a provision to establish education savings accounts. Twenty-one Republicans, most of whom represented rural school districts, joined House Democrats in opposition to the legislation over fears that such a proposal would undercut the funding public schools rely upon.

The funding for the program proposed by the Senate on Friday would not come from the same pot of money the state uses to fund public schools. However, schools receive state money based on student attendance, so they would lose funding for every child who leaves a public school to attend a private school under the state’s voucher program.

Last year, Abbott campaigned against the Republicans who helped block his plan. He successfully did so with the financial support of people like Pennsylvania billionaire Jeff Yass — a vocal critic of public schools — who have sought to use their money and influence nationally to sway the outcome of local elections against school voucher opponents.

Since then, many voucher opponents in the Texas House no longer hold seats, and Abbott has expressed confidence that the chamber now has enough votes to pass voucher legislation. Some opponents are holding out hope that pro-voucher legislators will stumble over disputes on the many moving parts still up in the air.

Brian Woods, head of grassroots advocacy at the Texas Association of School Administrators, said the recent prolonged House speaker battle shows that not all Texas Republicans “are on the same page” when it comes to vouchers or some other issues.

“Folks can agree on a general topic, but have a hard time reaching consensus on very specific items and that work is still yet to be done,” Woods said, though he also acknowledges the Legislature has a better chance of passing voucher legislation this session than in past years.

Earlier this week, the House and Senate also proposed allocating $4.85 billion in new funds to the state’s public schools. During the last legislative session, public schools did not receive a meaningful funding boost after lawmakers declined to pass a school voucher program. Abbott had promised not to sign a bill increasing public education funding without the passage of a voucher program. That left school districts across the state grappling with multimillion-dollar budget deficits, campus closures, declining enrollment, expired pandemic relief funds, inflation and teacher shortages.

This session, the Senate wants to increase teacher pay by $4,000. Teachers in rural areas would receive an additional $6,000 pay bump — a total of $10,000 — which Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said would close the salary gap between urban and rural teachers. It was not immediately clear whether teachers would receive the pay raise annually or one time only. The increase is higher than what lawmakers proposed last session but still falls short of what public school teachers say they need to bring their salaries in line with the national average.

Texas ranks 30th for average teacher salary, according to the National Education Association, which tracks educator pay across the U.S.

AUSTIN – The Texas Tribune reports that The Trump administration this week directed federal prosecutors across the country to investigate and potentially prosecute local officials who get in the way of its immigration crackdown.

It is not clear if any will get in the way in Texas.

Local officials across the state who are eager to help the administration’s immigration efforts have not offered concrete details about how they will cooperate with the federal government. And officials in the state’s Democratic cities — where the majority of the state’s undocumented population live and work — have not said much at all.

Immigrant rights advocacy groups and legal experts say the Trump administration’s threat Wednesday to prosecute local officials has no legal backing and is simply an attempt to intimidate local jurisdictions into helping with the mass deportations Trump promised during his presidential campaign.

“The Constitution and our laws are clear: The federal government cannot bully state officials into carrying out deportations, nor can they punish them for declining,” said Deirdre Schifeling, the American Civil Liberties Union’s chief political and advocacy officer.

The directive was among a flurry of executive actions Trump took this week. The administration also cut off access to an app that thousands of migrants used to make appointments to request asylum; promoted more cooperation between U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and local and state governments; and threw out policies that stopped authorities from arresting migrants at sensitive locations like schools and churches.

In Texas, some officials said they are ready to help Trump — but did not specify what that means. Among them is Tarrant County Judge Tim O’Hare, the top elected official in the 15th largest county in the country.

Nearly two decades ago as a city council member in Farmers Branch, a city in neighboring Dallas County, O’Hare tried to ban landlords from renting to anyone who lacked proof of citizenship. The ordinance was repeatedly struck down by federal judges and the city stopped defending it in 2014 after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from the city. The lawsuits over the policy, which was never enforced, cost the town $6.6 million.

O’Hare said he “fully supports” Trump’s agenda and trusts the president’s political advisers “to successfully address the massive crisis we have at our border,” his chief of staff Ruth Ray said.

“Tarrant County is committed to upholding the rule of law and ensuring the safety and security of its residents,” Ray said. “Tarrant County will fully and unequivocally support law and order and the enforcement of American immigration laws.”

Galveston County Judge Mark Henry noted that his county was the only one not located along the border to deploy deputies to help the state’s Operation Lone Star border enforcement program.

“Galveston County will collaborate and work fully with the Trump Administration on immigration enforcement and securing our southern border,” Henry said in a statement just before Trump’s inauguration.

In the state’s Democrat-led cities, officials stopped short of a full-throated condemnation of Trump’s new initiatives.

Spokespersons for the sheriffs in Bexar, Travis and Dallas counties — home to the state’s other largest metros — vowed to abide by state and federal laws and continue serving all of their residents.

“We are dedicated to public safety and law enforcement,” Travis County Sheriff Sally Hernandez said. “We offer top-level professional care to anyone in need of our services. We want victims to run to our agency in a crisis, not run away.“

El Paso Mayor Renard Johnson said he would stand by his commitment to safety for all and that everyone should feel safe going to school, churches and hospitals.

“Public safety is best served when every resident feels safe and protected,” he said.

Harris County District Attorney Sean Teare echoed the sentiment.

“Nothing about the rhetoric out of Washington will undermine my mission: Fighting for all crime survivors in our community,” Teare said in a statement provided by a spokesperson. “Any policy that makes victims of violent crime, such as domestic violence or aggravated robbery, less likely to contact law enforcement out of fear of legal retribution, should be reexamined.”

Texas cities that were accused of protecting undocumented immigrants through so-called “sanctuary” policies — such as directing local police not to cooperate with federal immigration officials — became the targets of a 2017 state law that prohibited local policies that prevent a peace officer from asking about a person’s immigration status. The law also requires that Texas authorities cooperate with federal immigration authorities.

HOUSTON – The Houston Chronicle reports that every day a flurry of parts and products are shuttled between Texas and Mexico, part of a cross-border supply chain to make everything from cars and heavy duty machinery to flat screen televisions. The future of that partnership, built over decades, is now in question under President Donald Trump’s threat to impose a 25% tariff on imports from Mexico and the Canada beginning Feb. 1.

While communities around the country would likely see higher prices — on everything from avocados to electronics — the stakes are particularly high for border states like Texas. In 2023, trade between Texas and Mexico exceeded $272 billion, making it the state’s largest trading partner. Canadian and Mexican officials are working to secure an agreement with the new Trump administration to avoid the tariffs, but the threat is enough to drive anxiety on both sides of the border. Trump has threatened to impose the tariffs if Mexico and Canada don’t take unspecified steps to stop the flow of migrants and illegal drugs into the United States. “The level of economic integration related to trade between the two countries is profound,” said Antonio Garza, a former Texas politician who served as U.S. ambassador to Mexico under former president George W. Bush and now works as an attorney in Mexico City. “It’s hard to find an aspect of our livelihoods that isn’t touched someway somehow, from the food we eat to the cars we drive. And the prospect of tariffs is very real.” What exactly those tariffs would look like remains unclear. Trump has talked about an across-the-board tariff, but such a move would likely drive up prices and hurt industries he wants to boost, like construction and oil and gas, whose leaders have donated to him heavily.

AUSTIN – The Dallas Morning News reports that theTexas House voted overwhelmingly Thursday to ban Democrats from holding powerful committee chairmanships, answering years of mounting pressure from leadership and grassroots conservatives to chip away at the power of the minority party in the Capitol. The new House rules also reserved all vice-chair positions on legislative committees for Democrats — a sticking point with some conservatives but a clear concession to the minority party, which for the first time in modern history will not be part of the speaker’s leadership team. “We were elected with 150 people representing the state of Texas,” said Rep. Todd Hunter, R-Corpus Christi, who helped write the new rules. “So our role is: Let’s get something done, and let’s not forget that we’ve got the main issues that we got to tackle.” Some Democrats lamented the loss of power for the minority party. Even so, most voted for the rules, glad for the opportunity to continue influencing the path of legislation.

“The people of Texas should be really proud of the Democrats that stood strong and have a lot to bring home today because of the positions and the powers that were gained through vice-chairmanships,” said Rep. Ramon Romero Jr., D-Fort Worth. “They’re not chairmanships, but we have a great role to play and we’re ready to play it.” The vote on the rules governing the House for the rest of the legislative session is typically a brisk battle over sensitive issues, and Thursday’s debate was teed up for fights over whether Democrats should lead committees, which bills should be given priority, and the proper protocol for bucking the authority of the powerful speaker’s office. Instead, more than two-thirds of the House, including members from both parties, turned the tables and halted debate after less than an hour of discussion — then overwhelmingly passed the new rules on a 116-23 vote. At stake in the fight were the levers of power in a chamber that recently emerged from a bruising intraparty clash to determine who would lead the GOP-dominated House.