According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), the fiscal implications of HB 3333 indicate that there would be no significant fiscal impact on the state. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), the primary agency affected by the bill, is expected to implement the new restrictions using existing staff and resources. This means that no additional appropriations or staffing increases are anticipated to enforce or administer the discharge permit restrictions outlined in the bill.

However, the fiscal impact on local governments is less certain. The analysis notes that the fiscal implications at the local level cannot be determined at this time. This uncertainty likely stems from the fact that the bill could affect future development plans, wastewater infrastructure, or economic activities within Val Verde County, particularly if new discharge permits would have supported growth or commercial operations. Local governments could face indirect costs or operational limitations depending on how reliant they are on new wastewater permitting options in the restricted area.

Overall, while the bill is fiscally neutral at the state level, its localized effects may vary based on how municipal and economic development interests intersect with the restricted zones along the Devils River. Further fiscal analysis might be warranted if future permit applications are blocked and alternative infrastructure becomes necessary.

While HB 3333 aims to preserve the ecological integrity of the Devils River—a laudable goal—it ultimately imposes a blanket ban on new wastewater discharge permits in Val Verde County that raises significant concerns from the standpoint of individual liberty, property rights, and free enterprise. The bill restricts the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) from issuing new permits for domestic and industrial wastewater discharge into classified segments of the Devils River or unclassified water bodies that feed into them, even if those discharges might fully comply with existing water quality standards. This one-size-fits-all approach substitutes regulatory discretion and scientific assessment with a rigid prohibition that may not be justified in all cases.

First, the bill reflects a form of government overreach. TCEQ already possesses the authority to deny permits that would harm water quality, backed by robust environmental assessment processes. HB 3333 eliminates the opportunity for applicants to demonstrate compliance or present engineering solutions, essentially second-guessing the professional judgment of regulators and replacing it with a political restriction. This could undermine faith in evidence-based regulatory systems and establish a precedent for similar blanket bans in other regions, irrespective of actual environmental risk.

Second, HB 3333 could chill future economic growth in Val Verde County. The region’s potential for small-scale industrial development, new housing, or rural enterprise may rely on cost-effective wastewater discharge solutions. By categorically prohibiting these permits, the bill could discourage private investment and complicate rural infrastructure planning. These are consequences that may be difficult to quantify now but could accumulate over time, particularly if alternative water treatment systems are prohibitively expensive or infeasible on certain properties.

Third, the bill imposes a substantial restriction on private property rights. Landowners in the affected region may find their development options significantly limited, regardless of their intentions to protect or enhance the land's environmental value. For example, a family wishing to construct a home subdivision, retreat center, or small-scale agricultural processing facility would be legally barred from obtaining a permit, even if they could design a discharge system with no measurable impact on the river. This undermines the principle that landowners should be able to responsibly use their property within the bounds of existing law.

Finally, the bill’s exception for stormwater discharges shows that some discharges are still considered acceptable within the watershed. This highlights the inconsistency of prohibiting others outright. A more balanced approach would be to raise discharge standards or require additional oversight for facilities within sensitive watersheds, rather than banning them entirely.

While the intention to protect the Devils River is reasonable, HB 3333 relies on an overly broad and inflexible regulatory method that encroaches on individual liberty, property rights, and local economic opportunity. A more nuanced solution, focused on strengthening permit conditions or improving enforcement, would better align with the principles of limited government and free enterprise. For these reasons, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on HB 3333.

• Individual Liberty: While the bill aims to preserve public environmental goods (clean water, scenic river access), it restricts how individuals, especially landowners and developers, can use their property. It prevents individuals from seeking state permits to discharge wastewater, even if that discharge could be safely managed and treated. This is a limitation on personal freedom to develop or utilize private land, particularly in a rural area where centralized wastewater infrastructure may be unavailable.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill can be seen as encouraging responsible stewardship of natural resources by preemptively limiting pollution in an ecologically sensitive area. However, it may also undermine the responsibility-based permitting system already in place, which evaluates applicants individually. By replacing that with a blanket ban, the bill may remove the incentive for individuals and businesses to invest in cleaner technologies or demonstrate compliance, since they would be denied a permit regardless of their environmental performance.
• Free Enterprise: The bill directly limits free enterprise by closing off the option for certain new businesses or developments that rely on discharge permits to operate. This is particularly burdensome in rural regions, where economic development often requires creative infrastructure solutions. Even environmentally responsible projects could be denied simply because of location, deterring investment and growth in Val Verde County. From a free market standpoint, the bill imposes a state-imposed barrier to entry.
• Private Property Rights: Perhaps the most direct impact is on private property rights. Landowners may find themselves unable to build, subdivide, or operate businesses on their land if those activities require a discharge permit. This bill could be seen as infringing on the principle that individuals should be free to make productive use of their property, subject to reasonable environmental safeguards, of which Texas already has many. The bill shifts the standard from conditional oversight to outright prohibition.
• Limited Government: Rather than refining or strengthening TCEQ’s case-by-case permitting authority, the bill removes discretion entirely in a defined region. It suggests that lawmakers, rather than regulators and engineers, are better equipped to determine the appropriateness of discharge activity. This is arguably an expansion of state power over a specific area’s development and environmental management, contrary to the principle that government should intervene only when necessary, and with minimal scope.

• SB 1911 (Similar To)