According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), SB 16 would have a negative net impact of approximately $5.78 million to General Revenue–related funds for the 2026–27 biennium, with continuing annual costs in subsequent years. The bill makes no appropriation but would provide the legal basis for appropriations needed to implement its provisions.

The majority of the fiscal impact comes from creating new judicial positions: 13 district judges, two appellate court judges, two district attorneys, a statutory probate court, and a statutory county court, as well as adding a district attorney to the Professional Prosecutors Act and funding a judicial mentorship program. Judicial and prosecutorial salaries are estimated at $175,000 annually, with additional benefit costs such as state contributions to retirement systems, Social Security, and health insurance. The Comptroller of Public Accounts estimates over $1 million in FY 2026 and $1.16 million in FY 2027 just for new district court salaries, plus travel costs, county court and probate court funding, and mentorship compensation.

Other costs include revising the compensation structure for visiting judges, implementing an annual leadership conference for judges and court administrators, technology upgrades for court data reporting, and possible relocation or expansion of the 15th Court of Appeals to accommodate new justices in FY 2028 and FY 2029. There are also potential but indeterminate local government impacts from changes to local court operations and increased penalties for certain offenses, which could place additional demands on local correctional resources.

Overall, SB 16 represents a significant recurring cost to the state tied to judicial system expansion and related administrative changes, with a projected staffing increase of 10–19 state employees over the first five years.

SB 16 is a sweeping omnibus measure that restructures and expands large portions of Texas’ judicial system. It creates at least 13 new district courts, multiple new county and probate courts, and several new district attorney offices. It also increases jurisdictional limits for statutory county courts, revises administrative processes for case assignment, court security, visiting judge compensation, and judicial reporting, and alters procedural rules under the Texas Supreme Court’s authority. Many of these changes, such as modernizing court administration, improving docket management, raising jurisdictional thresholds, and enhancing court security planning, could improve efficiency and potentially expand access to justice in high-growth or overburdened jurisdictions.

However, the bill’s overall fiscal and structural impact raises serious concerns regarding the principle of limited government. The Legislative Budget Board projects a net negative impact of approximately $5.78 million to General Revenue for the 2026–27 biennium, with recurring costs increasing over time as new courts and judicial positions come online. This includes salaries, benefits, and operating expenses for judges, prosecutors, court staff, and administrative functions, with the bill adding 10–19 new state employees in its first five years. These are permanent commitments with no built-in sunset provisions or performance reviews to ensure the additional capacity remains necessary in the long term.

From a liberty principles perspective, while SB 16 has positive implications for individual liberty and private property rights through potentially faster resolution of civil and criminal matters, it substantially conflicts with limited government by permanently expanding the size and cost of the judiciary without a data-driven safeguard mechanism. The bill does not condition the creation of new courts on objective caseload thresholds, does not phase them in based on demonstrated need, and does not provide for sunset reviews to re-evaluate their necessity over time. Without these guardrails, the measure risks “court creep”, permanent expansion regardless of whether initial justifications for the new positions remain valid.

For these reasons, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on SB 16 unless amended as described. These changes would allow the efficiency and access-to-justice benefits to be preserved while maintaining fiscal discipline and preventing unnecessary long-term government growth. As written, however, the bill’s structural expansion outweighs its benefits, warranting opposition unless significant amendments are adopted.

• Require caseload-based triggers for activating new courts and prosecutorial offices
• Phase implementation to align with demonstrated needs
• Incorporate sunset provisions with mandatory performance audits

• Senate Committee on State Affairs: 11Y/0N