According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), the full fiscal impact of SB 1 is indeterminate because several major cost drivers and offsetting revenue sources cannot be reliably estimated. The bill would create new administrative functions for the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM), the Texas Commission on Fire Protection (TCFP), and the Department of State Health Services (DSHS), while also authorizing new fees, gifts, grants, and donations to help defray costs.

TDEM anticipates needing $808,333 in FY 2026 and $191,667 in FY 2027 to launch and operate the statewide volunteer registration and management database, expand training for justices of the peace, and establish the emergency manager licensing framework. These figures do not include future-year expenses for criminal history checks or the cost of supervising annual emergency management plan drills. DSHS projects the need for one new Emergency Management Program Coordinator III position, costing $130,718 in FY 2026 and $165,468 in FY 2027, to develop a statewide communications plan and coordinate with TDEM. While DSHS can handle some duties with existing resources and leverage its federally funded Texas Mass Fatality Operations Response Team, it would still need to build a new mass fatality data management system to meet all bill requirements, with those costs currently unquantifiable.

The fiscal note also highlights uncertainties surrounding the consolidated Small- and Micro-Business Disaster Recovery Loan Program. The number of qualifying businesses, total loan demand, and any related state revenue from repayments are unknown. Similarly, the number of applicants for emergency manager licenses, the number of volunteer database registrants, and the associated fee revenues cannot be predicted. The volume and timing of any gifts, grants, and donations are likewise uncertain.

Local governments could face additional, but unquantified, expenses to comply with mandated annual drills and post-disaster after-action reports.

While the intent to improve readiness and coordination is laudable in SB 1, many of the same concerns that applied to the filed version remain, namely, the bill’s reliance on expanding centralized bureaucracy, adding regulatory mandates, and creating new permanent state-run programs rather than focusing on empowering localities and voluntary efforts.

The Committee Substitute continues to require that all emergency management coordinators hold a state-issued license, complete state-approved training, and renew credentials annually. This centralizes staffing authority in Austin, limits local discretion in selecting qualified leaders, and imposes recurring costs on both the state and the license holders. Similarly, the bill retains the requirement for local governments to use a statewide volunteer management system for disaster response, with background checks and agency discretion to deny registration, risking delays, discouraging community participation, and replacing Texas’s tradition of spontaneous, neighbor-to-neighbor aid with a permission-based system.

From a business and property rights perspective, SB 1 continues to impose prescriptive regulations on private campground operators in floodplains, dictating specific safety equipment and evacuation plan requirements. While safety is an important goal, these mandates limit operational flexibility and add compliance costs without clear evidence that they are the most effective or necessary approach.

Fiscal implications remain a concern. The Legislative Budget Board still projects more than $1 million in initial biennial costs for TDEM and DSHS, with indeterminate ongoing expenses for database maintenance, licensing, and compliance enforcement. The anticipated revenue from fees, gifts, and grants is unpredictable, leaving taxpayers likely to shoulder program costs over time.

While the bill addresses some genuine gaps in preparedness, such as formalizing succession plans for key officials and enhancing mass fatality response capabilities, these benefits are outweighed by the broad and permanent expansion of state authority, new regulatory regimes, and open-ended fiscal commitments. The legislation would be better aligned with the principles of limited government and individual liberty if it were amended to:

• Limit volunteer registration and credentialing requirements to high-risk, specialized roles;
• Recognize equivalent private, military, or out-of-state credentials in lieu of state licensing;
• Include sunset provisions to reevaluate new programs after a set period; and
• Narrow prescriptive mandates on private businesses.

Absent such amendments, SB 1 risks burdening taxpayers, constraining local control, and dampening community-driven disaster response without sufficient justification. As such, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on SB 1 unless amended as described above.

• Individual Liberty: The bill restricts who can serve as local emergency coordinators and who may participate in official disaster recovery by requiring state licenses, mandatory training, and volunteer registration with background checks, limiting free and direct citizen participation.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill encourages preparedness and accountability through required training and after-action reporting, but shifts readiness from voluntary initiative to state-mandated compliance.
• Free Enterprise: The bill expands post-disaster loan access for small businesses, but imposes prescriptive safety and operational mandates on private campground operators, increasing compliance costs and limiting flexibility.
• Private Property Rights: The bill does not seize property but narrows the owner's discretion by dictating specific operational and equipment requirements for certain private businesses in floodplains.
• Limited Government: The bill expands state scope with new licensing regimes, a centralized volunteer database, and added local mandates, moving disaster management functions further from local control toward permanent state oversight.