BILL ANALYSIS

C.S.H.B. 5339

By: Wilson

Higher Education

Committee Report (Substituted)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The bill author has informed the committee that extreme soil degradation is a current threat to our country's agricultural future and food security and that current conventional agricultural methods are increasingly unaffordable for small farmers and have perpetuated a cycle of debt for many large farmers in Texas. The bill author has further informed the committee that regenerative agriculture is an innovative approach to improving soil health and that anecdotal evidence and limited studies indicate that regenerative farming benefits include increased water capture and retention, improved water quality, reduced cost of inputs, increased yields, reduced use of pesticides, greater biodiversity and resilience to weather events, and high-quality, nutrient-dense food.

C.S.H.B. 5339 seeks to establish a higher education regenerative agriculture grant program to encourage research regarding pesticide use, the study of successful regenerative agriculture, the development of certain innovative, evidence-based methods to support agricultural producers, and the provision of regenerative agriculture-focused education and technical assistance programs. The bill requires the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to administer and award grants under the program.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the committee's opinion that rulemaking authority is expressly granted to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board in SECTION 1 of this bill.

ANALYSIS

C.S.H.B. 5339 amends the Education Code to require the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) to establish and administer the higher education regenerative agriculture grant program under which the THECB may award grants to eligible public institutions of higher education to do the following:

· conduct research to assess the benefits and risks of pesticide use, including the impact of pesticide use on the environment and on public health;

· study successful regenerative agriculture operations and identify practices and methods to support persons in Texas seeking to implement regenerative agriculture on their land;

· develop innovative, evidence-based methods to support agricultural producers in bioremediation and other scientifically supported techniques that promote beneficial soil bacteria and microorganisms and increase crop yields; and

· provide students, agricultural producers, and rural communities with regenerative agriculture-focused education and technical assistance programs founded upon transparent and objective research protocols.

The bill defines "regenerative agriculture" as a holistic system of agricultural practices and techniques that enhance overall soil health, increase soil organic matter, improve water infiltration and retention, increase resilience to droughts and flooding, enrich biological diversity, and proliferate beneficial soil microbes through a combination of practices based on the following principles:

· ensuring the presence of living roots in the soil throughout the year to nourish the ecosystem;

· minimal disturbance to limit disruption to the soil structure and its living organisms, while actively protecting and promoting soil microbial diversity;

· the encouragement of biological diversity through varied crop rotations, cover crops, and intercropping strategies;

· soil armor to maintain soil coverage with living plants, crop residues, or mulch to prevent exposure of bare soil, reduce risks of wind and water erosion, and protect soil biology from harmful temperature extremes;

· animal integration, including incorporating livestock and poultry to recycle nutrients and stimulate soil biological activity without overwhelming the soil ecosystem; and

· context-based practices to tailor the regenerative agricultural practices to the characteristics of a particular piece of land, climate conditions, and any cropping or livestock systems present on that land.

C.S.H.B. 5339 requires the THECB to do the following in administering the grant program:

· collaborate with the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB) to do the following:

o align research funded under the program with existing soil and water conservation programs;

o ensure projects funded under the program complement statewide efforts to improve soil health and reduce pesticide usage; and

o facilitate partnerships between institutions that are awarded program grants and local soil and water conservation districts;

· identify opportunities to align the program with federal initiatives or grants to maximize program funding and impact;

· ensure that research funded under the program meets the following criteria:

o is conducted independently using the proper scientific method;

o is not compromised by external factors or parties; and

o complies with any requirements imposed by state or federal law;

· establish a framework for monitoring and evaluating the outcomes of research and other activities funded under the program;

· ensure that findings, research, data, and recommendations resulting from research funded under the program are made publicly accessible;

· provide technical assistance to institutions that apply for a grant under the program;

· conduct periodic reviews and site visits to ensure proper use of grant funds and compliance with grant agreements;

· oversee the creation and maintenance of a statewide online resource hub to share educational materials, research findings, and best practices developed through the program;

· require program grant recipients to submit to the THECB annual progress reports that include:

o research and education achievements related to agricultural sustainability;

o measurable outcomes, such as the adoption of regenerative agriculture farming practices or reductions in pesticide use by producers; and

o financial documentation detailing the use of grant funds; and

· ensure that institutions that misuse grant funds or fail to meet program requirements are subject to suspension or termination of grant funding, disqualification from future grant cycles, and repayment of misused grant funds.

C.S.H.B. 5339 establishes the following criteria for a public institution of higher education to be eligible to receive a grant under the program for a state fiscal year:

· requires an institution to apply to the THECB in the manner prescribed by THECB rule and satisfy any other criteria prescribed by THECB rule in accordance with the bill's provisions; and

· prohibits an institution from deriving more than 25 percent of the institution's agricultural program funding from any entity that manufactures, markets, or sells farming inputs, including pesticides, fertilizers, or patented seeds.

C.S.H.B. 5339 requires the THECB, in awarding program grants, to give priority to the following institutions of higher education, with the first priority given to those institutions that are not land grant universities:

· institutions that conduct community-centered outreach and applied research such as the Texas State University's Small Producers Initiative;

· institutions that demonstrate active, collaborative partnerships with agricultural producers and organizations to implement regenerative farming practices; and

· institutions that maintain academic independence through full funding-source disclosure.

C.S.H.B. 5339 prohibits the THECB from awarding more than 30 percent of the total amount of grant funds allocated under the program for a state fiscal year to an institution of higher education and requires the THECB, in its application review and funding allocation process for the program for a state fiscal year, to ensure a reasonable distribution of funds across institutions statewide. The bill restricts the use of grant money awarded under the program to the following purposes:

· multiyear research projects focused on transitioning agricultural producers to regenerative agriculture farming systems through evidence-based techniques, peer-reviewed studies, and event coordination;

· research on healthy soil practices, including identifying practical and beneficial techniques for achieving and maintaining soil health, such as bioremediation and other innovative methods to increase crop yields and enhance beneficial soil microbiology;

· institution of higher education-led education and training programs to support agricultural producers in Texas in implementing regenerative agriculture methods on their land, with priority given to programs that provide resources for small and mid-sized farms;

· support for student-led projects, internships, and research initiatives focused on regenerative agriculture;

· development and distribution of digital and physical educational resources for rural agricultural communities and farming regions;

· collaborative research initiatives between institutions of higher education, nonprofit organizations, and agricultural organizations to pilot and test regenerative farming solutions;

· comprehensive research on categories of pesticides, including balanced assessments of their sustainability, risks, and long-term impact on ecosystems and public health, with particular attention to the impact on vulnerable populations such as farmers and children in rural communities; and

· any additional purposes approved by THECB rule following a thorough and systematic review.

The bill defines "nonprofit organization" as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.

C.S.H.B. 5339 authorizes the commission to solicit and accept gifts, grants, and donations from any public or private source for the program in addition to any money appropriated for the program. The bill requires the THECB to adopt rules as necessary for the administration of the program, including rules prescribing program guidelines, application forms, and report templates for institutions of higher education under the program.

C.S.H.B. 5339 requires the THECB, in collaboration with TSSWCB to annually prepare and submit to the legislature a report summarizing the following:

· the outcomes, benefits, and challenges of the program, including any unintended consequences;

· the progress made under the program in reducing pesticide use and improving soil health in Texas; and

· legislative recommendations to further advance regenerative agricultural research, education, and outreach in Texas, including data and independent evaluations to support those recommendations.

C.S.H.B. 5339 requires the THECB, not later than January 1, 2026, to develop and make available on the THECB website an application form for the grant program as well as report templates and guidelines for institutions of higher education under the program.

C.S.H.B. 5339 applies beginning with the 2026-2027 academic year.

EFFECTIVE DATE

On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2025.

COMPARISON OF INTRODUCED AND SUBSTITUTE

While C.S.H.B. 5339 may differ from the introduced in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following summarizes the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.

The substitute includes a definition of "nonprofit organization" not present in the introduced.

Whereas the introduced version defined "regenerative agriculture" as agricultural practices and techniques that accomplish certain goals and fall within one or more specified principles, the substitute defines that term as a holistic system of agricultural practices and techniques that accomplish the goals through a combination of practices based on specified principles. The substitute replaces the goal of increasing biological diversity in agricultural systems, as in the introduced, with the goal of enriching biological diversity and includes the goals of increasing resilience to droughts and flooding and proliferating beneficial soil microbes, neither of which were in the introduced. The principles specified in the introduced and substitute differ as follows:

· whereas the introduced included maintaining living roots within the soil, the substitute includes ensuring the presence of living roots in the soil throughout the year to nourish the ecosystem;

· whereas the introduced included minimizing soil disturbance, the substitute includes minimal disturbance to limit disruption to the soil structure and its living organisms, while actively protecting and promoting soil microbial diversity;

· whereas the introduced included maximizing diversity in the soil, the substitute includes the encouragement of biological diversity through varied crop rotations, cover crops, and intercropping strategies;

· whereas the introduced included protecting the soil surface, the substitute includes soil armor to maintain soil coverage with living plants, crop residues, or mulch to prevent exposure of bare soil, reduce risks of wind and water erosion, and protect soil biology from harmful temperature extremes;

· whereas the introduced included integrating livestock and poultry, the substitute includes animal integration, including incorporating livestock and poultry to recycle nutrients and stimulate soil biological activity without overwhelming the soil ecosystem; and

· whereas the introduced included improving agricultural resilience and restoration, the substitute includes context-based practices to tailor the regenerative agricultural practices to the characteristics of a particular piece of land, climate conditions, and any cropping or livestock systems present on that land.

Both versions of the bill provide for the establishment and administration of the grant program. However, the introduced and substitute differ as follows:

· whereas the introduced provided for a program to fund institutions of higher education for specified purposes, the substitute provides for a program under which the THECB may award grants to eligible institutions for those purposes;

· the substitute includes among the specified purposes the conduct of research to assess the benefits and risks of pesticide use, including the impact of pesticide use on the environment and on public health, whereas the introduced specified that such research assesses the environmental, mental, health, and ecological impacts of pesticide use within Texas and beyond;

· the substitute includes among the purposes the study of successful regenerative agriculture operations and identification of practices and methods to support persons in Texas seeking to implement regenerative agriculture on their land, which is not present in the introduced;

· whereas the introduced provided for the purpose relating to the development of methods to support agricultural producers in transitioning to organic and pesticide-free farming practices, the substitute specifies that such methods are to support agricultural producers in bioremediation and other scientifically supported techniques that promote beneficial soil bacteria and microorganisms and increase crop yields; and

· with respect to the purpose of providing certain education and technical assistance programs, the substitute specifies that those programs are founded upon transparent and objective research protocols, whereas the introduced did not.

The substitute includes requirements not present in the introduced for the THECB to identify opportunities to align the program with federal initiatives or grants, ensure that research funded under the program meets certain criteria, establish a framework for monitoring and evaluating the outcomes of research and other funded activities, and ensure that findings, research, data, and recommendations resulting from research funded under the program are made publicly accessible.

The substitute specifies that the measurable outcomes required to be included in a program grant recipient's annual progress report can include the adoption of regenerative agriculture farming practices instead of organic farming practices, as in the introduced.

Both versions of the bill establish consequences for institutions found to misuse grant funds or that fail to meet program requirements, but the substitute requires the THECB to ensure that such institutions are subject to those consequences.

The substitute replaces the introduced version's grant of eligibility to all public institutions of higher education with a provision establishing eligibility criteria for a public institution of higher education that requires application to the THECB in the manner prescribed by THECB rule, requires satisfaction of any other criteria prescribed by THECB rule, and restricts eligibility to institutions who do not derive more than 25 percent of their agricultural program funding from any entity that manufactures, markets, or sells farming inputs, including pesticides, fertilizers, or patented seeds. The substitute accordingly does not include the introduced version's provision requiring the THECB to develop program guidelines and applications.

Both versions of the bill require that certain institutions be given priority under the program. However, the introduced and substitute differ as follows:

· the introduced included non-land-grant universities conducting applicable community-centered outreach and applied research among the institutions to be given priority, whereas the substitute includes any institution conducting such outreach and research and specifies that, among the institutions to be given priority, first priority is given to those institutions that are not land grant universities;

· the substitute specifies that the partnerships qualifying an institution for priority under the program are collaborative partnerships, whereas the introduced did not; and

· the substitute replaces the introduced version's requirement that priority be given to institutions whose agricultural programs obtain 25 percent or less of their funding from companies that manufacture, market, or sell synthetic pesticides with a requirement that institutions that maintain academic independence through full funding-source disclosure be given priority.

The substitute includes provisions not present in the introduced prohibiting the THECB from awarding more than 30 percent of the total amount of grant program funds for a state fiscal year to an institution of higher education and requiring the THECB to ensure a reasonable distribution of funds across institutions statewide.

Both versions of the bill restrict the use of grant funds for specified purposes; however, the introduced and substitute differ as follows with respect to those provisions:

· the introduced specified that the authorized multi-year research projects focus on transitioning agricultural producers from conventional pesticide use to regenerative and organic farming systems, whereas the substitute provides that such projects focus on transitioning such producers to regenerative agriculture farming systems through evidence-based techniques, peer-reviewed studies, and event coordination;

· the substitute specifies that the authorized research on healthy soil practices may include bioremediation and other applicable innovative methods, whereas the introduced did not;

· the introduced specifies that the authorized education and training programs target agricultural producers, with an emphasis on small and mid-sized farms, whereas the substitute specifies that the authorized education and training programs support agricultural producers in Texas in implementing regenerative agriculture methods on their land, with priority given to programs that provide resources for small and mid-sized farms;

· the introduced included among the authorized uses support for student-led projects, internships, and research focused on pesticide harm reduction, whereas the substitute does not;

· the substitute specifies that the authorized assessments relating to pesticide research are balanced assessments, whereas the introduced did not; and

· the substitute replaces the provision in the introduced including impacts on children living in rural communities and farmers' health among the authorized pesticide research categories with a provision specifying that such research be conducted with particular attention to the impact on vulnerable populations such as farmers and children in rural communications.

The substitute includes provisions not present in the introduced that do the following:

· authorize the commission to solicit and accept gifts, grants, and donations from any public or private source for the program; and

· require the THECB to adopt rules as necessary for the administration of the program.

With respect to the annual report required to be provided to the legislature, the two versions of the bill differ as follows:

· the introduced required the THECB and TSSWCB to jointly prepare and submit the report, whereas the substitute requires the THECB to submit and prepare the report in collaboration with TSSWCB;

· the substitute specifies that the report must summarize the outcomes, benefits, and challenges of the program, including any unintended consequences, whereas the introduced required the report to summarize the outcomes and impacts of the program, including both benefits, negatives, and other outcomes; and

· the introduced specified that the recommendations in the report are legislative recommendations to further advance agricultural sustainability research, education, and outreach, whereas the substitute specifies that such recommendations are recommendations to further advance regenerative agriculture research, education, and outreach, including data and independent evaluations to support the recommendations.

The introduced made its provisions applicable beginning with the 2025-2026 academic year, whereas the substitute makes its provisions applicable beginning with the 2026-2027 academic year.

The substitute replaces the provision in the introduced establishing a deadline for the annual reports, including any guidelines, recommendations, and approvals, to be made available on the THECB website with a provision establishing a deadline for report templates and guidelines for institutions under the grant program to be made available on that website.