Patricia Harless

How will House Bill 2528 help nonprofits fund economic development in your district?

It’s going to be a big challenge for the nonprofits to get the MUDs to participate. But after they participate, [MUDs] can add a box on their water bill to allow a member of the community to check it off to contribute [to economic development projects]. So if the MUDs chose to go forward with it, they can add that to their water bills, and there’s going to be a community education process to do that. You have to check it off and add a dollar to your bill or however much you want to add. But say the average person adds $1 a month. That’s $12 a year times—in a subdivision like Champion Forest—at least 1,200 homes. If half of those people do it, that’s a significant amount of money for economic development.

You served on the conference committee for Senate Joint Resolution 5, which could fund $3 billion a year to the State Highway Funds starting in 2018 if approved by voters. How significant will that bill be for Texas transportation funding?

I think that’s probably one of the best bills [through which] we’ve had an opportunity to really aggressively fund transportation because the money on the Rainy Day Fund [from Proposition 1] isn’t always going to be there. If the economic stabilization drops below a certain level, then we could lose some of that funding. But [SJR 5 is] going to provide a significant portion every year if the general sales tax [revenue]exceeds $28 billion, which it has done for a number of years. [Another] part of [transportation] funding, too, is we did away with the diversions. So we stopped all of the diversions out of the Highway Fund with the exception of the constitutionally dedicated education [funding], the quarter that comes out of the dollar. But that’s about $600 million a year additional [in the] budget for transportation.

What bill did you file this session that wasn’t successful that you wish had been?

My [municipal utility district] legislation [HB 2389] was important to me. But I had lots of concerns if it went forward. What does that mean to my constituents? Does it mean they’ll pay city of Houston taxes? And I didn’t want to do that. But I hope that people like [Rep.] Rick Miller, [R-Sugar Land], and [Rep.] Dan Huberty, [R-Kingwood], and others who now understand these limited-purpose annexation agreements and the necessity that we have a little control over the tax revenue that’s leaving our area— that they’ll continue to bring that to the attention of the public. Hopefully my [successor] will pick up that ball and run. Because it’s $60 million in unincorporated Harris County that’s leaving our districts and going to the city of Houston’s budget.

Were you pleased with the overall work done by the Legislature this session?

It seemed like this session was a slow play, which I’m sure it was because we filed more bills than we’ve ever filed, and we’ve passed fewer than we’ve ever passed. There was a lot of stuff that didn’t get done because it seemed like the House and the Senate weren’t in a hurry. I think it was more of a game of chicken with the House and the Senate. There was a lot of big pieces of legislation—the tax cuts, the franchise cuts, the border security, the budget—that got tied up in the dynamics of, ‘Who’s going to win this battle: the House or the Senate?’ So all of the rest of our bills that were little bills that didn’t have influence over those big issues got slow-played because of the dynamics going on. But that’s what the process is about. It’s not necessarily to pass a bunch of bills. And when we leave passing fewer bills than we’ve ever passed, that saves us and our constituents a lot of unintended consequences.

Why made you decide not to run for re-election in 2016?

I’ve been thinking about it for a couple of sessions. I love serving my district. It’s been a huge honor, and my constituents have always given me flexibility and independence. I don’t vote straight in line with my Republican party or straight in line with these outside groups that want to score [legislators]. It’s been frustrating the last couple of sessions because these outside groups have become such a loud voice. It’s gotten to where if you’re a Republican, you can’t really [support] your district. [These groups] don’t care about the issues in your district, and the bills that I carry are unique in my district, and they may not be a Republican issue. It’s a very draining—mentally, physically, financially—position because you’re away from your family, you’re away from your friends and your business. It’s time for me to put my family first instead of my constituents, who I consider family as well.  They’ve taken the front seat for the last 8 1/2 years. It’s time to put my husband and my son and my family first now.

Are you pleased with what you accomplished in your time with the Legislature?

I’m very pleased. I feel like we spent a lot of time trying to understand what the needs of the district are. And besides the photo voter ID legislation, which had statewide implications, most of the bills that I passed have to do with my community. And every year I’ve been successful in passing those bills, and I work hard and have close relationships with my colleagues. It’s always been fairly easy for me to get things done. I know some people spend years there and never can accomplish anything. But I value relationships, and I’ve worked hard on those relationships and they’ve been beneficial for my district.

What will you do now that you are not running for re-election?

For 30 years I was a community activist, and that’s how I got asked to run for office. I will continue doing that. I still really want to remain involved in Republican politics because I have lots of concerns in the direction we’re going. The party is so divided right now. We’ve made it to where the conversation and campaigns now [are] if you reach across the aisle—you work together and build a consensus—it’s a bad thing.