According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), SB 1395 is not expected to have a fiscal impact on the state budget. The bill's provisions, while requiring certain procedural changes and transparency enhancements in how Local School Health Advisory Councils (SHACs) are formed and operate, do not necessitate additional funding or resources from the state level​.

At the local level, school districts may incur minor administrative costs. These costs could arise from developing new appointment procedures for SHAC membership, maintaining public records of meetings, and ensuring compliance with enhanced transparency requirements, such as posting notices and recording meetings. However, the LBB notes that these costs are not anticipated to be significant and should be absorbable within existing district budgets.

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) is not expected to experience fiscal consequences as a result of the bill. Since the SHACs operate at the district level, and the bill does not impose new oversight or reporting responsibilities on the TEA, the agency's administrative and financial responsibilities remain unchanged.

In summary, SB 1395 is designed to enhance SHAC governance and transparency without creating a substantial financial burden on either the state or local education agencies. While some minor costs may be incurred by school districts, these are expected to be manageable within current operational frameworks.

SB 1395 strengthens parental involvement and transparency in Texas school health education policy by restructuring the membership and operations of Local School Health Advisory Councils (SHACs). The bill requires that each school board trustee appoint an equal number of SHAC members, with voting and executive leadership roles limited to parents of enrolled students who are not employed by, or closely related to employees of, the school district. It also mandates transparency measures such as recorded meetings and timely posting of notices and minutes.

The bill addresses long-standing concerns that SHACs have become dominated by school personnel or affiliated individuals, diluting parental influence. By mandating that parents occupy the majority of voting positions and all executive roles, SB 1395 realigns SHACs with their original legislative intent—to ensure that local health education policy reflects the values of the community, especially those of parents. This supports the principle of Individual Liberty by giving parents a stronger voice in school decisions affecting their children.

From a fiscal and regulatory standpoint, the bill has minimal impact. The Legislative Budget Board notes no cost to the state and only minor administrative costs at the local level, which are expected to be absorbable by districts. Importantly, the bill does not impose new burdens on private citizens or businesses, nor does it create new government agencies or taxes. While it introduces new procedural requirements, these are narrowly targeted and designed to improve transparency and public accountability, key aspects of Limited Government.

Overall, SB 1395 is a thoughtfully crafted bill that strengthens local control, enhances parental engagement, and promotes open government practices without expanding state bureaucracy or increasing taxpayer burdens. For these reasons, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on SB 1395.

• Individual Liberty: The bill affirms individual liberty by strengthening the role of parents, those most directly impacted by school health policy, in shaping how health education is delivered. By requiring that the majority of SHAC voting members and all council leaders be parents unaffiliated with the district, the bill elevates citizen influence over bureaucratic control. This fosters a more democratic and accountable advisory process and honors the right of individuals to participate meaningfully in local governance.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill promotes personal responsibility by recognizing parents as the primary decision-makers in their children's education. It assumes that community members, particularly parents, are capable of making informed judgments about public health and education policy. By prioritizing their leadership within SHACs, the bill affirms a cultural expectation that families—not institutions—should drive value-based decisions for students.
• Free Enterprise: The bill does not create any mandates or restrictions on private businesses, nor does it affect the competitive environment in education or healthcare services. It is narrowly focused on the composition and procedures of local school advisory bodies and has no bearing on market dynamics.
• Private Property Rights: The legislation does not directly impact ownership, use, or control of private property. As such, it neither enhances nor restricts property rights.
• Limited Government: This is where the bill's effects are most nuanced. On the one hand, it limits the influence of public employees over community advisory bodies and increases transparency through open meetings, recorded sessions, and timely disclosures—clear gains for public oversight and accountability. On the other hand, it imposes rigid state-level rules on local school districts, reducing flexibility in how they select SHAC members and conduct operations. For smaller or resource-limited districts, these requirements could feel overly prescriptive. If viewed as a recalibration of influence rather than a top-down expansion of bureaucracy, the bill supports the principle of limited government.