Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate limits counties’ power to require cash bonds for pipeline construction
Summary
The Senate passed House Bill 206 after suspending regular order, preventing counties from imposing mandatory cash bonds as a condition of approving pipeline construction while preserving other financial assurance options such as performance bonds.
The Texas Senate on Monday moved and passed House Bill 206, a measure that prevents counties from requiring cash bonds as a condition for approving pipeline construction while preserving other means of financial assurance such as performance bonds.
The change matters to pipeline developers and counties: proponents said mandatory cash bonds can impose heavy financial burdens and create regulatory uncertainty for projects that cross multiple counties; opponents have argued counties need tools to secure potential damage recovery.
Senator Birdwell, the bill’s floor sponsor, told the Senate that a number of counties had begun to impose cash bond requirements that could force pipeline developers into a costly position, especially for large projects that cross multiple counties. Birdwell said the bill would ensure counties could not compel a cash bond while leaving counties able to accept cash bonds if a company offers one voluntarily. The Senate suspended its rules to take up the house measure and advanced it through second and third readings; the floor record shows the rules were suspended and the bill passed by roll-call tallies announced on the floor.
Floor text reported the Senate’s procedural votes: the rules suspension to take up HB 206 carried on a roll call reported as 27 ayes and 3 nays; the bill passed to third reading by the same tally; the Senate then suspended the constitutional three‑day rule and finally passed the bill with the floor announcement that it had “finally passed.”
The statute as described in the legislative caption would limit local authority to require a cash bond before approving pipeline construction; counties would still be able to require reimbursement mechanisms and accept alternative assurances.
Supporters framed HB 206 as reducing regulatory costs and uncertainty for infrastructure projects that cross multiple local jurisdictions; the transcript contains sponsor explanations but no on‑floor amendments changing the bill text.
