Monitoring the Session

HB 2273

Bonnen Bill Lets One Unnamed Gulf County Judge Hand Off Duties

Became law, effective Sep 1, 2025

Verdict: Smells

SmellsInitial review
Rep. Greg BonnenRHouse 24
Why it's charged
Bracket bill

THE TEXT

“(2) with a population of at least 350,000 and not more”…

Bill text, introduced version (I)

A narrow population band, combined with Gulf adjacency and a neighbor of 3.3 million or more, describes what looks like a single county without naming it. The caption only says "certain counties," so it admits the bill is narrow but does not say which county.

Bracket bill

Initial review · graded Oct 20, 2026 · Headline, summary and grade are analysis of the bill text, not a finding about any person · How we grade

Caption

relating to the delegation of certain authority of a county judge in certain counties.

Caption from analyzed text · version I.

Summary

350,000 to 370,000 people, on the Gulf, next to 3.3 million. The caption’s “certain counties” is one.

The bill expands an existing state law that lets the county judge in a very large county delegate some of the judge's duties. It adds one more county: one with 350,000 to 370,000 people that sits on the Gulf of Mexico next to a county of at least 3.3 million. Starting September 1, 2025, the judge in that one added county gains the same power to hand off duties that big-county judges already have.

Receipt

The receipt

89R-HB2273 · 2025-01-30

SOLD BY

ITEM

relating to the delegation of certain authority of a county judge in certain counties.

WHAT IT DOES

350,000 to 370,000 people, on the Gulf, next to 3.3 million. The caption’s “certain counties” is one.

The bill expands an existing state law that lets the county judge in a very large county delegate some of the judge's duties. It adds one more county: one with 350,000 to 370,000 people that sits on the Gulf of Mexico next to a county of at least 3.3 million. Starting September 1, 2025, the judge in that one added county gains the same power to hand off duties that big-county judges already have.

CHARGES

[x] BRACKET BILLanalysis confidence 60%

THE TEXT

“(2) with a population of at least 350,000 and not more”…

Bill text, introduced version (I)

A narrow population band, combined with Gulf adjacency and a neighbor of 3.3 million or more, describes what looks like a single county without naming it. The caption only says "certain counties," so it admits the bill is narrow but does not say which county.

TOTAL

No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

LBB estimate · fiscal note version E · source

Sources

Fiscal note · version E · May 17, 2025

No first-year general revenue figure available here.

LBB published estimates · flow over the stated periods.

Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

HISTORY

  1. Filed
  2. Read first time
  3. Referred to s/c on County & Regional Government by Speaker
  4. Scheduled for public hearing in s/c on . . .
  5. Considered by s/c in public hearing
  6. Testimony taken/registration(s) recorded in subcommittee
  7. Left pending in subcommittee
  8. Recalled from subcommittee
  9. Considered in formal meeting
  10. Reported favorably w/o amendment(s)
  11. Comte report filed with Committee Coordinator
  12. Committee report distributed
  13. Committee report sent to Calendars
  14. Considered in Calendars
  15. Placed on General State Calendar
  16. Read 2nd time
  17. Passed to engrossment
  18. Record vote RV#2384
  19. Statement(s) of vote recorded in Journal
  20. Read 3rd time
  21. Passed
  22. Record vote RV#2463
  23. Reported engrossed
  24. Received from the House
  25. Read first time
  26. Referred to Local Government
  27. Scheduled for public hearing on . . .
  28. Considered in public hearing
  29. Testimony taken in committee
  30. Vote taken in committee
  31. Reported favorably w/o amendments
  32. Recommended for local & uncontested calendar
  33. Committee report printed and distributed
  34. Placed on local & uncontested calendar
  35. Laid before the Senate
  36. Read 2nd time & passed to 3rd reading
  37. Vote recorded in Journal
  38. Three day rule suspended
  39. Record vote
  40. Read 3rd time
  41. Passed
  42. Record vote
  43. Senate passage reported
  44. Reported enrolled
  45. Signed in the House
  46. Signed in the Senate
  47. Sent to the Governor
  48. Signed by the Governor
  49. Effective on 9/1/25
FILED UNDER

No verified beat found.

SIGNED FOR BY

House · 141 yea · 0 nay

Senate · 31 yea · 0 nay

Sources

House: Final passage · May 14, 2025. Journal. Published stock for this vote. Snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

Senate: Final passage · May 25, 2025. Journal. Published stock for this vote. Snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

All floor motions and other positions below.

Smells

THANK YOU FOR CHECKING THE RECEIPT

CAMPAIGN PAID FOR BY

CAMPAIGN PAID FOR BY

Donors

Donors report through Friends of Dr. Greg Bonnen.

Not tied to this bill.

Sources

The author's campaign account only. Own money and internal transfers are separate on the member page.

Derived itemized flow · Jul 1, 2024 to Oct 24, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Derived itemized contributions on live regular reports and uncovered special-session dates. Internal account transfers and daily reports are excluded.

Money

Missing data does not establish zero giving. Display amounts are rounded.

Votes5

Senate May 25, 2025

Final passage

Yea
31
Nay
0
Present, not voting
Not printed
Absent
Not printed
Excused
Not printed
Names

Senate journal

Names were not printed. No individual positions are inferred.

The journal row lists three votes in order: passage to third reading, suspension of the three-day rule, and final passage. This entry records final passage. Repeated tallies belong to separate votes.

Sources

HB 2273 (Middleton) Relating to the delegation of certain authority of a county judge in certain counties. (viva voce vote) (31-0) (31-0)

Published stock of positions for this vote, except where marked derived.

  • Yea: 31 (published)
  • Nay: 0 (published)
  • Present, not voting: Not printed
  • Absent: Not printed
  • Excused: Not printed

Senate journal. Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

Senate May 25, 2025

Suspension of the three-day rule

Yea
31
Nay
0
Present, not voting
Not printed
Absent
Not printed
Excused
Not printed
Names

Senate journal

Names were not printed. No individual positions are inferred.

The journal row lists three votes in order: passage to third reading, suspension of the three-day rule, and final passage. This entry records suspension of the three-day rule. Repeated tallies belong to separate votes.

Sources

HB 2273 (Middleton) Relating to the delegation of certain authority of a county judge in certain counties. (viva voce vote) (31-0) (31-0)

Published stock of positions for this vote, except where marked derived.

  • Yea: 31 (published)
  • Nay: 0 (published)
  • Present, not voting: Not printed
  • Absent: Not printed
  • Excused: Not printed

Senate journal. Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

Senate May 25, 2025

Passage to third reading

Yea
Not printed
Nay
Not printed
Present, not voting
Not printed
Absent
Not printed
Excused
Not printed
Names

Senate journal

Names were not printed. No individual positions are inferred.

The journal row lists three votes in order: passage to third reading, suspension of the three-day rule, and final passage. This entry records passage to third reading. Repeated tallies belong to separate votes.

Voice vote. No numeric tally or individual yeas are inferred.

Sources

HB 2273 (Middleton) Relating to the delegation of certain authority of a county judge in certain counties. (viva voce vote) (31-0) (31-0)

Published stock of positions for this vote, except where marked derived.

  • Yea: Not printed
  • Nay: Not printed
  • Present, not voting: Not printed
  • Absent: Not printed
  • Excused: Not printed

Senate journal. Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

House May 14, 2025

Yea
141
Nay
0
Present, not voting
2
Absent
4
Excused
3
Names

Named positions matched to lawmakers. See the journal for unmatched names.

House journal

Sources

Record 2463

HB 2273 was passed by (Record 2463): 141 Yeas, 0 Nays, 2 Present, not voting.

Published stock of positions for this vote, except where marked derived.

  • Yea: 141 (published)
  • Nay: 0 (published)
  • Present, not voting: 2 (published)
  • Absent: 4 (derived from named list)
  • Excused: 3 (derived from named list)

House journal. Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

House May 13, 2025

Yea
134
Nay
2
Present, not voting
2
Absent
8
Excused
4
Names

Named positions matched to lawmakers. See the journal for unmatched names.

House journal

Sources

Record 2384

HB 2273 was passed to engrossment by (Record 2384): 134 Yeas, 2 Nays, 2 Present, not voting.

Published stock of positions for this vote, except where marked derived.

  • Yea: 134 (published)
  • Nay: 2 (published)
  • Present, not voting: 2 (published)
  • Absent: 8 (derived from named list)
  • Excused: 4 (derived from named list)

House journal. Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

Witnesses13
For
11
Against
0
On
2
Names

For

  • Comal County, County Judges & Commissioners Association of Texas1 registration
  • Conference of Urban Counties2 registrations
  • County Judges and Commissioners Association of Texas2 registrations
  • Galveston County Commissioners Court1 registration
  • Self1 registration
  • Self; Galveston County4 registrations

On

  • Self2 registrations
Sources

13 parsed registrations across the loaded witness lists.

Derived stock of witness registrations. Repeated appearances count separately. Organizations and self-representation appear as printed.

House witness list. Source snapshot 2026-10-20, Central time.

Senate witness list. Source snapshot 2026-10-20, Central time.

Fiscal

No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

LBB estimate · fiscal note version E · source

Sources

Fiscal note · version E · May 17, 2025

No first-year general revenue figure available here.

LBB published estimates · flow over the stated periods.

Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

How this was graded

Analysis of text version I by claude-opus-5-5, Oct 20, 2026, against the published rubric.

Sources

Texas House · Filed Jan 30, 2025

06/20/2025 E Effective on 9/1/25

Texas Legislature Online · Introduced · House Committee Report · Engrossed · Senate Committee Report · Enrolled

Data snapshot Oct 26, 2026 at 4:19 AM CDT. Grades, charges, quotes and corrections follow the published record.

Sponsors

House committee · Intergovernmental Affairs · Committee vote 11 aye, 0 nay · Out of committee

Senate committee · Local Government · Committee vote 6 aye, 0 nay, 1 absent · Out of committee

Companion

SB 1813 by Middleton (identical)

Subjects

GALVESTON COUNTY

County Government--Employees/Officers

County Government--General

Courts--County & Statutory

Courts--Judges

Text

The text as introduced · 195 words

89R10183 AMF-D

By: Bonnen
H.B. No. 2273

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

relating to the delegation of certain authority of a county judge in

certain counties.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1. The heading to Section 81.028, Local Government

Code, is amended to read as follows:

Sec. 81.028. DELEGATION OF DUTIES OF [ A ] COUNTY JUDGE IN

CERTAIN COUNTIES [ WITH POPULATION OF MORE THAN 1.5 MILLION ].

SECTION 2. Section 81.028(a), Local Government Code, is

amended to read as follows:

(a) This section applies only [ exclusively ] to a county

judge in a county :

(1) with a population of more than 1.5 million ; or

(2) with a population of at least 350,000 and not more

than 370,000 that is adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico and adjacent to

a county with a population of at least 3.3 million .

SECTION 3. The heading to Section 81.029, Local Government

Code, is amended to read as follows:

Sec. 81.029. DELEGATION OF DUTIES OF [ A ] COUNTY JUDGE TO

COUNTY COMMISSIONER IN CERTAIN COUNTIES.

SECTION 4. This Act takes effect September 1, 2025.