TEXAS STATE VITA

I. Academic/Professional Background

A. Name and Title

Name: Dr. Christopher R. Brown	Title: Associate Professor

B. Educational Background

Degree	Year	University	Major	Thesis/Dissertation
JD	1996	University of Texas at Austin	Law
MPAFF	1996	University of Texas at Austin	Public Affairs
BA	1986	Northwestern University	History, minor Biology

C. University Experience

Position	University	Comments	Dates
Supervising Attorney, Tulane Environmental Law Clinic	Tulane University. New Orleans, LA, United States	Supervised third-year law students with student - attorney bar cards who litigated primarily in federal court under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation Recovery Act, and similar statutes.	August 30, 2004 - August 30, 2005

D. Relevant Professional Experience

Position	Entity	Comments	Dates
Water Projects Attorney	National Wildlife Federation	2004 - 2007
Environmental Attorney II	Texas Commission on Environmental Quality	2003 - 2004
Assistant Attorney General II	Texas Attorney General's Office	2000 - 2002
Natural Resources Specialist	Texas Senate ResearchCenter	1998 - 2000
Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable Royal Furgeson	United States District Court	1997 - 1998
Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable Ann McClure	Texas Eighth Court of Appeals	1996 - 1997

E. Other Professional Credentials (licensure, certification, etc.)

Licensed to Practice Law in Louisiana, State Bar of Louisiana. (May 1, 2004 - Present).

Licensed to Practice Law in Federal Courts, Federal Bar. (January 1, 1999 - Present).

Licensed to Practice Law in Texas, State Bar of Texas. (January 1, 1999 - Present).

II. TEACHING

A. Teaching Honors and Awards:

Award / Honor Recipient: Alpha Chi National Honor Society Favorite Professor, Alpha Chi National Honor Society.

September 1, 2015 - Present

B. Courses Taught:

Texas State University:

LS 5341 - ADMIN LAW

LS 5350 - LEGAL DRAFTING

LS 5360 - ADV LITIGATION

LS 5399 - APP RESEARCH PROJ

PA 3340 - ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

PA 5340 - PUBLIC LAW

PA 5380A - TEXAS WATER LAW & POLICY

POSI 4302 - LGL THEORIES & RSC

POSI 4361 - ADMIN LAW

POSI 4379 - INDEP STUDY

POSI 5330 - PRB IN PUB LAW

POSI 5378 - SOCIAL LEGISLATION

POSI 5379 - LEGAL DRAFTING

POSI 5383 - ADV LITIGATION

POSI 5386 - LEGAL THRY & ANALY

POSI 5387 - LEGAL RESEARCH

;

POSI 5390 - ADMIN LAW

POSI 5394 - LITIGATION

POSI 5398 - DIR READING&RES

C. Directed Student Learning (i.e. theses, dissertations, exit committees, etc.):

Member, Applied Research Project, “Desalination in Texas,” Status: Completed: (December 5, 2023) Sustainability Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s): Ricardo Briones Graduate, M. Sociology.

Member, Exit Exam Committee, “Comprehensive Exam.” Status: Completed (April 21, 2023).

Public Administration, Texas State University.

Student: Robert Johnson, MPA.

Member, Exit Exam Committee, “Comprehensive Exam.” Statuts: Completed (December 2, 2023).

Public Administration: Texas State University.

Student: Sarah Wynn, MPA.

Member, Exit Exam Committee, “Comprehensive Exam.” Status: Completed. (December 3, 2023).

Public Administration: Texas State University .

Student: Miriam Murr, MPA.

Member, Exit Exam Committee, “Comprehensive Exam.” Status: Pending. (Ongoing guidance to student).

Public Administration: Texas State University.

Student: Amy Fanguy White.

Member of Committee and Advisor to Crosville Williams, Masters Thesis, Evaluation of	Dropout Prevention in Texas High Schools;

Member: Applied Research Project, “Devising Effective Water Conservation Legislation in Texas.” Advised student on revisions to the questions he plans to pose to water specialists in state and local government; assisted in proofreading, editing and revising the draft language in the ARP. Student: Kaylee Boggan. Status: completed (Spring 2023).

,

Member, Exit Exam Committee, “Comprehensive Exam,” Status: Completed (April 28, 2022).

Public Administration, Texas State University

Student(s): Samantha Griesinger, Graduate, MPA.

Member, Applied Research Project, “Desalination in Texas,” Status: Completed. (March 2, 2022). Public Administration, Texas State University.

Student(s): Sheila Cunningham, Graduate, MPA.

Member, Exit Exam, “Comprehensive Exam,” Status: Completed (July 25, 2022). Public Administration, Texas State University.

Student(s): Alison Castillo, Graduate, MPA.

Member, Exit Exam, “Comprehensive Exam,” Status: Completed (April 28, 2022). Public Administration, Texas State University.

Student(s): Roxanne Saldivar, Graduate, MPA.

Member, Exit Exam, “Comprehensive Exam,” Status: Completed (July 28, 2022).

Public Administration, Texas State University.

Student(s): Tyra Medina, Graduate, MPA.

Member, Exit Exam, “Comprehensive Exam,” Status: Completed ( November 7, 2022). Public Administration. Texas State University.

Student: Mary Johnson.

Member, Applied Research Project, “Constitutionality of Nonresident Tuition,” Status: Completed (January 15, 2022- April 26, 2022). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s): Michael Rana, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, “Dangers of Prosecutorial Misconduct,” Status: Completed (January 15, 2022- April 26, 2022). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s): Kendall Stickle, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, “An Examination of S.B. 8’s Interpretation of Standing,” Status: Completed (January 15, 2022- April 26, 2022). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s): Kelly Torpey, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, “An Argument for Including Prisoners under the Fair Labor Standards Act,” Status: Completed (January 15, 2022- July 29, 2022). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s): Alexandra van Niman, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, “Use of the Good Faith Exception for No-Knock and Defective Warrant Searches,” Status: Completed (January 15, 2022- July 29, 2022). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s): Henry Greieve, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, “Applicability of the Coerced Confession Defense,” Status: Completed (January 15, 2022- July 29, 2022). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s): Dante Lemons, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, “Analysis of James E. Wilson’s Case,” Status: Completed (January 15, 2022- July 29, 2022). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student: Michaela Pitt, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, “Protecting Our History: An Overview of Cultural Property Laws in the United States and Other Countries,” Status: Completed (January 15, 2022- July 29, 2022). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student: Melody Walters, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, “Misclassification of Employees as Independent Contractors,” Status: Completed (January 15, 2022- July 29, 2022). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student: Ariana Ruiz, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Exit Exam, “Comprehensive Exam,” Status: Completed (May 6, 2022). Public Administration, Texas State University.

Student: Andrell Walters, Masters of Public Administration.

Member, Exit Exam, "Comprehensive Exam", Status: Completed. (November 30, 2021). Public Administration, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Jason Chamblin, Graduate, MPA.

Member, Exit Exam, "Comprehensive Exam", Status: Completed. (August 15, 2021 - November 15, 2021). Political Science (Public Administration), Texas State University.

Student(s):	Hunter White, Graduate, MPA.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Social Media Incitement of Riot under Texas Law", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2021 - July 28, 2021). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Erin Hill, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Restrictions Placed on UCMCS (NAFTA) Workers and their Dependents", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2021 - July 26, 2021). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Laura Ramos, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Second Amendment Jurisprudence in the Fifth Circuit", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2021 - July 26, 2021). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Preston Bass, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "The Law Governing Companion Animals in Texas", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2021 - July 26, 2021). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Suzanne Allee, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Dissecting APA Claims in US Immigration Law", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2021 - July 20, 2021). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Alejandra Pasillas, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, ""Harry Styles's First Amendment Right to Free Speech on San Marcos High School's Campus"", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2021 - July 20, 2021). Political Science (Legal Studies), Texas State University.

Student(s):	Haley Rimmer, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, ""Unlawful Employment Termination under the Sabine Pilot Exception"", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2021 - July 20, 2021). Political Science (Legal Studies), Texas State University.

Student(s):	Lina Jarmond, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, ""Analysis of Stacy Reed's Case"", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2021 - July 20, 2021). Political Science (Legal Studies), Texas State University.

Student(s):	Madelyn Wesolick, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Child Custody and Parental Rights in Texas for Same-Sex Couples", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2021 - July 15, 2021). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Amara Maseda, Graduate, Masters in Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Gauging Water Conservation efforts of Central Texas Municipalities against Best Management Practices set forth by the Texas Water Development Board", Status: Completed. (December 2, 2020). Public Administration, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Yvonne Spell, Graduate, Masters of Public Administration Fall 2020.

Member, Exit Exam, "Comprehensive Examination", Status: Completed. (November 20, 2020). Public Administration, Texas State University.

Student(s):	James Regan, Graduate, Masters of Public Administration.

Member, Exit Exam, "Comprehensive Examination", Status: Completed. (August 15, 2020). Public Administration, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Corey Benbow, Graduate, Masters of Public Administration.

Supervisor / Chair, Applied Research Project, "Texas Grandparents' Right to Obtain Conservatorship over Grandchildren", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2019- May 1, 2019). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Brent Bauer, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Supervisor / Chair, Applied Research Project, "Reform of Federal Sentencing Guidelines", Status: Completed. (January 15, 20219 - May 1, 2019). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Charisma Alexander, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, Status: Completed. (January 15, 2019- May 1, 2019). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Emily Strole, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Supervisor / Chair, Applied Research Project, "Reforming Texas Tort Law of Proximate Cause", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2019 - May 1, 2019). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Lesa Surber, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, Status: Completed. (January 15, 2019- May 1, 2019). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Lexy Vela, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, Status: Completed. (January 15, 2019 -May 1, 2019). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Lia Obermeyer, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Evaluation of Public Administration Programs", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2022- May 1, 2019). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Nicole Foy, Graduate, M.P.A.

Supervisor / Chair, Applied Research Project, "Legal Remedies for Sexual Harassment in the United States Military", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2019- April 30, 2019). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Alexis Guerrero, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Immigration", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2019- April 30, 2019). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Naomi Narcisse, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Sustainable Development in Higher Education: A description of Sustainability Efforts in Texas 4 Year Colleges", Status: In Progress. (December 5, 2017 - December 5, 2018). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Kevin Schulz, Graduate, M.P.A.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Sustainability Programs in New Braunfels, Texas", Status: Completed. (February 2017 - November 2018). Sustainability, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Rebecca Beahan, Graduate, M.A.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Second Degree Murder Analysis under Texas Law", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2018 - November 15, 2018). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Ahmed Pedro, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Excessive Bail Analysis under Texas Law", Status: Completed. (January 15, 2018 - November 15, 2018). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Luisa Morales, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "A Revaluation of Federal Courts' Criminal Sentencing Guidelines", Status: Completed. (December 3, 2017 - December 6, 2017). Political Science/Legal Studies Texas State University.

Student(s):	Tiffani Gallegos, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Evaluation of a Medical Malpractice Claim against a Veteran's Hospital", Status: Completed. (December 1, 2017 - December 6, 2017). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Lori Bohannon, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Smith's Escaped Deer: Legal Status of a Breeder Deer Escaped onto an Adjoining Ranch", Status: Completed. (September 1, 2017 - December 6, 2017). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Slade Kasper, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Revocation of Corporate Charters for Criminal Environmental Offenders", Status: Completed. (May 1, 2017 - December 6, 2017). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	James Kemp, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Mobile Crisis Outreach: A Proposal for Implementing a Practical Ideal Type.", Status: Completed. (December 1, 2017 - December 5, 2017). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Michelle Collins, Graduate, M.P.A.

Advisor, legal issues involved in flood management for Applied Research Project, "A Reassessment of Flood Control Management and Planning", Status: Completed. (February 1, 2017 - August 4, 2017). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Tyler Blakey, Graduate, M.P.A.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Guns Beyond the Home: An Issue Congress and the Supreme Court Must Address", Status: Completed. (April 4, 2017 - May 6, 2017). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Erika Orr, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Thee Criminal Defendants: Different Applications of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines", Status: Completed. (March 1, 2017 - May 3, 2017). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Deborah Gillis Harry, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "The Project of [Marijuana] Legalization Unfolds: States' Experience, Suggested Guidelines", Status: Completed. (November 15, 2016 - December 1, 2016). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Andre Price, Graduate, M.P.A..

Member, Applied Research Project, "Citizens United in the Context of Prior First Amendment Jurisprudence", Status: Completed. (July 15, 2016 - August 1, 2016). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Julianna Thomaides, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, Status: Completed. (July 15, 2016 - August 1, 2016). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Kelsey Rodney, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, Status: Completed. (July 15, 2016 - August 1, 2016). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Lisa Dotson, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Statutory Changes", Status: Completed. (July 15, 2016 - August 1, 2016). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Samantha Houston, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Proximate Cause Analysis in Aransas v. Shaw Endangered Species Act Case", Status: Completed. (July 1, 2016 - August 1, 2016). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Meghan Taack, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Social Media Guidelines for Texas Police Departments", Status: Completed. (April 10, 2016 - April 25, 2016). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Jorge Alfaro, Graduate, M.P.A..

Member, Applied Research Project, "Electronic Poker and Texas Gaming Laws", Status: Completed. (April 16, 2016 - April 21, 2016). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Alex Fones, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Uber Confronts American Labor Law", Status: Completed. (April 15, 2016 - April 21, 2016). Politifcal Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Chad Kunsman, Graduate, Masters of Legal.Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Child Custody Issues", Status: Completed. (March 30, 2016 - April 21, 2016). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Ashley Stuart, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Qualified Immunity and Excessive Force", Status: Completed. (March 30, 2015 - April 21, 2016). Political Science/Legal Studies, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Keisha Abrams, Graduate, Masters of Legal Studies.

Supervisor / Chair, Independent Study, "Environmental Components of the Paso Del Norte Region", Status: Completed. (August 1, 2015 - December 1, 2015). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Lindsey Bentley, Undergraduate.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Limitless: Exploring the Constitutionality of Indefinite Solitary Confinement", Status: Completed. (November 1, 2015). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Alvarez Rebecca, Graduate.

Member, Applied Research Project, "The Influence of Foreign Law in U.S. Courts: A Look at the "American Laws for American Courts" Movement", Status: Completed. (April 1, 2015). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	McGath Justin, Graduate.

Member, Applied Research Project, "Does Drug Testing As a Prerequisite to Receiving Government Benefits Violate the Constitution?", Status: Completed. (April 1, 2015). Political Science, Texas State University.

Student(s):	Reynolds Devan, Graduate.

Member, Exit Exam, Status: Completed. (2014).

Student(s):	Sandra Serna, Graduate.
Jessica Schorrenberg, Graduate.
Jeremy Garrett, Graduate.
Julie Moore, Graduate.
Bill Courtney, Graduate.
Avery Krushall, Graduate.
Christina Baker, Graduate.
Rhonda Wiederstein, Graduate.
Remington Burklund, Graduate.
Aaron Diaz, Graduate.
Caitlyn Meade, Graduate.

Member, Exit Exam, Status: Completed. (2013).

Student(s):	Edith Galvan, Graduate.
Austin DeBoer, Graduate.
Robin Bonner, Graduate.
Hannah Ging, Graduate.
Doris McDonald, Graduate.
Remington Burklund, Graduate.
Peggy Halamicek, Graduate.
Shanna Brown, Graduate.
Debra Gonzales, Graduate.
Patty Hwang, Graduate.
Rory Adame- Wilson, Graduate.
Yvonne Flores-Cale, Graduate.
Denise Drusek, Graduate.

Member, Exit Exam, Status: Completed. (2012).

Student(s):	Jeff Davis, Graduate.
Christine Milmo, Graduate.

Member, Exit Exam, Status: Completed. (2011).

Student(s):	Connie Norton, Graduate.
Ashley Rendon, Graduate.
Ashley Duncum, Graduate.
Edward Munguia, Graduate.
Charles Evers, Graduate.
Jason Irle, Graduate.
Travis A Whetsell, Graduate.
Lois Taylor, Graduate.
Linda Turner, Graduate.
Allison Carter, Graduate.
Misty Martin, Graduate.

Member, Exit Exam, Status: Completed. (2010).

Student(s):	Stephanie Nutt, Graduate.
Dalyce Hooper, Graduate.
DeAnna Curcio, Graduate.
Jennifer Carter, Graduate.
Oscar Pena, Graduate.

Member, Exit Exam, Status: Completed. (2009).

Student(s):	James Wilson, Graduate.
David Copeland, Graduate.
Olivia Thompson, Graduate.
Nachele Groomes, Graduate.
Carol McDonnel, Graduate.

D. Courses Prepared and Curriculum Development:

Intensive Training Course in "Relativity" Software for Litigation Classes, Curriculum Development, The Relativity Corporation. Approved: August 2017.

POSI 5378 Social Legislation, First Time Course Preparation, Texas State University. Taught: September 2015 - December 2015.

Additional Comments: POSI 5378, entitled Social Legislation, is an elective in the Masters in Legal

Studies program. Developed a course for social legislation

centered around a new topic, employment discrimination, and focused especially

on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.

POSI 5378 Social Legislation, First Time Course Preparation, Texas State University September 2014-December 2014.

Additional Comments: POSI 5378, entitled Social Legislation, is an elective in the Masters in Legal Studies program. Developed a course for social legislation that centered around a new topic : Environmental Justice.

POSI 5378: Social Legislation. First Time Course Preparation.

Preparation. Additional Comments: POSI 5378, entitled Social Legislation, is an elective in the Masters in Legal

Studies program. Developed a course for social legislation. Centered around a new topic:

The Voting Rights Act and election law Jurisprudence

PA 5380 C: Topics in Local Government Law : New Course. Texas State University, September 2022-present. Not yet approved.

Additional comments: This course will address statutory and case law that pertains strictly to Texas local governmental entities. The topics this course addresses include key provisions in statutes one would encounter as a local government practitioner, including the Texas Local Government Code, the Texas Tort Claims Act, the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Texas Government Code, the Open Meetings Act, and the Public Information Act.

An increasing number of public administration students express an interest in pursuing a career in local government. Currently the public administration curriculum contains no course that addresses the panoply of legal issues specific to cities, counties, special purpose districts, and other local governments; this course seeks to eliminate this disservice to the cohort interested in municipal careers.

LS 5375 : Environmental Litigation, New Course, Texas State University. Approved: August 2021 – revised and approved October 2022..

Environmental Litigation Composite-1.docx

Additional Comments: Course description and approval are attached.

TEXT: Jerry L. Anderson and Dennis Hirsch, Environmental Law Practice: Problems and Exercises for Skills Development (2d ed. 2003).

COURSE OBJECTIVES AND JUSTIFICATION:

This course conducts an in-depth examination of researching, filing, and litigating claims under federal and state environmental statutes. The course focuses on the aspects of environmental litigation that make it different than its non-environmental counterparts.

Environmental Litigation will fill a longstanding gap in the Legal Studies curriculum between GEO 5314, Environmental Law, which legal studies students can take for credit toward their degree, and two required litigation courses: LS 5340 (Litigation) and LS 5360 (Advanced Litigation). Neither of the two litigation courses currently offered addresses the extensive issues unique to litigation in the environmental context. As a result, the cohort of students who consistently enroll in Environmental Law and express an interest in this field as a career option are left without a course that addresses the practice and litigation dimensions of environmental law. They can study the statutes but nothing more.

The Environmental Litigation course will fill that gap. It will offer students an in-depth analysis of the nexus between environmental and administrative law and the resulting issues unique to this area that must be addressed to take an environmental case to court. The new course will also complement the curriculum of LS 5341 (Administrative Law), in which students interested in environmental law often enroll.

At present, no course in the Legal Studies program offers a synthesis of environmental, administrative, and litigation issues. Environmental Litigation both addresses an academic and vocational interest that Legal Studies students have and reflects one of the larger objectives of the program: providing courses that demonstrate the interrelationship among different areas of the law.

SYLLABUS: ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION

PART ONE. Environmental Compliance.

Example: Complying with Clean Air Act’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program. Sources of authority:

1. Researching United States Code and case law, U.S. Code Congressional and Legislative News, Congressional Committee Reports.

2. Compliance authorities: Researching Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, EPA Hotlines. Counseling a client on compliance.

PART TWO: Environmental Enforcement

3. The lawyer’s role in enforcement.

4. Self auditing and reporting, inspections, the agency enforcement process.

5. Penalties, Supplemental Environmental Projects, practice considerations regarding enforcement, case law on enforcement.

6. Citizen suit enforcement: information gathering, pre-suit notice.

7. Citizen suit enforcement, part two: drafting the complaint.

8. Citizen suit enforcement, part three: diligent prosecution, standing, mootness (‘in violation” problem).

9. Citizen suit enforcement, part four: potential recovery, suits against the agency.

PART THREE: Environmental Litigation

10. The Lawyer’s role in the administrative process: representing the client in the agency.

11. The Lawyer’s role in environmental litigation. Practice issues: Superfund litigation, part one.

12. Practice issues: Superfund litigation, part two: section 107 liability, individual liability.

13. Practice issues: Superfund litigation, part three: joint and several liability, successor liability, municipal solid waste.

14. Practice issues: Superfund litigation, part four: interim landowner, innocent landowner, penalties, cost allocatio

PA 5380A: Topics in Texas Water Law and Policy, New Course, Texas State University Department of Political Science. Public Administration. Approved: August 2017 - December 2017.

Additional Comments:

COURSE DESCRIPTION:

This course surveys in-depth Texas water law and regulation. No other single state issue is more important for this state’s public administrators. Texas' burgeoning population over the next 50 years will demand more water than foreseeable supply, capping growth and endangering the states’ rivers, aquifers, and coastal estuaries.

Officials from the Texas Water Development Board, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, and Texas Parks and Wildlife, as well as the Edwards Aquifer Authority, San Antonio Water System, and San Antonio River Authority have expressed interest in this course and making presentations on various issues. Faculty from other departments on campus such as Aquatic Biology and Geography may also participate.

COURSE OBJECTIVES:

(1) Students will master the legal principles that govern the distribution of Texas surface water: riparian rights, remnants of civil law from the Spanish colonial period, and especially the law of prior appropriation that the state administers through its permitting system and the concept of a usufruct.

(2) Students will learn to read surface water permits, understand the factors that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality must consider when evaluating a permit application -- such as water availability models and in-stream flow requirements -- and become fluent with the permitting process.

(3) Students will grasp the reality of the permitting system on a policy level as it exists today, especially with regard to the over-appropriation of the state’s rivers and the market for secondary, unperfected rights.

(4) Students will gain an understanding of the rule of capture as Texas courts have applied it to Texas groundwater and the de facto limitations on absolute groundwater ownership that groundwater districts, regional and state groundwater planning, and so-called “desired future conditions” represent.

(5) Students will analyze the Texas water policy issues created by including population pressures, imminent ecological damage, and its economic consequences. Students will explore policy proposals to mitigate these problems in the form of such innovations as reuse, desalination, and conservation techniques.

COURSE DESCRIPTION

This course surveys in-depth Texas water law and regulation. No other single state issue is more important for this state’s public administrators. Texas' burgeoning population over the next 50 years will demand more water than foreseeable supply, capping growth and endangering the states’ rivers, aquifers, and coastal estuaries.

Public Administration, Revise Existing Course, Texas State University. Approved: September 2020 - December 2020.

Additional Comments: Comprehensive review and revision of PA 5340 (Public Law) and PA 3340 (Administrative Law) to identify and create alignment with THECB expectations for marketable skills in the curriculum.

E. Teaching Grants and Contracts

1. Funded External Teaching Grants and Contracts:

2. Submitted, but not Funded, External Teaching Grants and Contracts:

3. Funded Internal Teaching Grants and Contracts:

4. Submitted, but not Funded, Internal Teaching Grants and Contracts:

F. Other:

Chair and Presenter at Panel Discussion as Part of Common Experience and Discourse in Democracy, Served as Chair and Gave Presentation on Groundwater Contamination in Texas: “Echoes of Flint: Water Quality Threats to Texas Cities.” Tuesday, September 24, 2019., Public Administration Program. San Marcos, TX, United States. 90. (September 24, 2019).

Seminar, Conservation Leadership Seminar, Texas State University. San Marcos, TX, United States. 14. (April 5, 2018).

Additional Comments: during my developmental leave I enrolled in Andrew Sansom’s course entitled Conservation Leadership, which addressed the challenges that face non-profit environmental organizations. I completed the course requirements and assisted Dr. Sansom with certain aspects of the course based on my own experience as an attorney and lobbyist for conservation organizations in Louisiana and Texas.

G. Teaching Professional Development Activities Attended

III. SCHOLARLY/CREATIVE

A. Works in Print (including works accepted, forthcoming, in press):

1. Books:

a. Scholarly Monographs:

b. Textbooks:

c. Edited Books:

d. Chapters in Books:

Refereed:

Brown, C. R. ( In Press). A Litigious Proposal: A Citizen’s Duty to Challenge Climate Change in the Courts. In P. G. Harris (Ed.), Ethics, Environmental Justice, and Climate Change (First, pp. 385–457). 10 Heatherley Road, Camberley, Surrey,GU15 3LW UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Non-refereed:

Brown, C., & Ruger, W. (2013). Public Policy in Texas. In The State of Texas: Government, Politics and Policy. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Brown, C., & Mora, S. (2013). The court system in Texas. In The State of Texas: Government, Politics and Policy. New York: McGraw-Hill.

e. Creative Books:

2. Articles:

a. Refereed Journal Articles:

Brown, C. R. (2020). The Special Purpose District Reconsidered: The Fifth Circuit’s Recent Declaration that the Edwards Aquifer Authority is a Special Purpose District under the Voting Rights Act, and the Tortured History that Led to That Decision. Hastings Environmental Law Journal, 27(1). Retrieved from https://repository.uhastings.edu/hastings_environmental_law_journal.https://repository.uhastings.edu/hastings_environmental_law_journal.

The Special Purpose District Reconsidered CB-1.pdf

Rahm, D., Brittain, V., Brown, C., Garofalo, C., Rangarajan, N., Shields, P., & Yun, H. J. (2015). Exploring the demand for PhDs in public affairs and administration. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 21(1), 115–128.

Brown, C. (2013). Proposed CAFO information Disclosure Rules and Their Potential to Improve Water Quality. Arizona Journal of Environmental Law and Policy, 4(5). Retrieved from https://www.ajelp.comhttps://www.ajelp.com

Brown, C. (2013). Dairy Discharges: How Misguided Federal Decisions on Surface Water Quality Also Harm New Mexico’s Tributary Groundwater. New Mexico Law Review, 42(2).

Brown, C. (2013). National Pork Producers Council v. E.P.A.: Ethical Implications of Mistaken Decision that Curtailed Water Quality Enforcement Against Factory Farms. South Texas Law Review, (54).

Additional Comments: article presented at ethics symposium at South Texas College of Law

Brown, C. (2013). EPA’s Proposed CAFO Information Disclosure Rules and Their Potential to Improve Water Quality. Arizona Journal of Environmental Law and Policy, 47. Published.

Brown, C., & Farrar, B. (2011). Gone to Texas: Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, The Texas Compliance History System, and the Need for Better Regulation of Out of-State Applicants. Texas Environmental Law Journal, 42, 24–Jan.

Brown, C. (2011). When the “Plain Text” Isn’t So Plain: How National Pork Producers Council Restricts the Clean Water Act’s Purpose and Impairs Its Enforcement Against Factory Farms. Drake Journal of Agricultural Law, 16(3), 375–428.

Brown, C. (2011). Uncooperative Federalism, Mistaken Textualism: The Federal Courts’ Hostility Toward Pre-Discharge Regulation of Confined Animal Feeding Operations under the Clean Water Act. Temple J Ournal of Science, Technology, and the Environment, 30(2), 175–219.

Brown, C. (2010). A Litigious Proposal: Judicial Reasoning on Climate Change, the Current Absence of Real Federal Regulation, and the Resulting Duty of Citizens to Combat Climate Change in the Courts. Journal of Law and Litigation, 25(2), 385–458.

Brown, C. (2008). A Hole in the Bucket: Aspermont’s Impact on Groundwater Districts and What It Says about Texas Groundwater Policy. Texas Environmental Law Journal, 39(1), Jan–39.

Brown, C. (1999). A New Chapter for Texas Groundwater? The Rule of Capture, Groundwater Conservation Districts, and Sipriano v. Great Spring Waters of America. In Brief Texas Senate Research Center. Published.

b. Non-refereed Articles:

Brown, C., & McClure, J. A. C. (1997). Evidence Can Be Appealing: Preservation of Error In Evidentiary Appeals. Kazen’s Monthly Family Law Newsletter. Published.

3. Conference Proceedings:

a. Refereed Conference Proceedings:

b. Non-refereed:

Brown, C. (2012). Nineteenth Annual Law Review Ethics Symposium: Ethical Implications for the Commercial Use of Animals.

4. Abstracts:

5. Reports:

6. Book Reviews:

Durant, R. F., & Brown, C. (2009, January 7). Review: The Greening of the U.S. Military: Environmental Policy, National Security, and Organizational Change. Armed Forces & Society: Official Journal Of The Inter-University Seminar On Armed Forces And Society.

7. Essays:

8. Poems:

9. Short Stories:

10. Other Works in Print:

B. Works Not in Print:

1. Papers Presented at Professional Meetings:

Brown, C. R., National Conference of the American Association for Paralegal Education, "Green Priorities: The Need for Environmental Training in Paralegal Education," NAAfPE, National Conference, Portland, OR, United States. (November 2, 2009).

Brown, C., Continuing Legal Education in Environmental Law, "Environmental Impacts of Clear Skies Initiative Rulemaking," Tulane Law School, Clean Air Act conference, New Orleans, LA, United States. (April 4, 2004).

2. Invited Talks, Lectures, and Presentations:

Brown, C. R. (Chair/Presenter), Hardberger, A. (Presenter), Jenna, W. (Presenter), Common Experience/Discourse in Democracy, "“It Can’t Happen Here"," Texas State University/ Public Administration Program, Public Administration Presentation under Aegis of Discourse in Democracy, San Marcos, TX, United States. (September 24, 2019).

File_ItCantHappenHere-1.htm

Additional Comments: The PowerPoint slide version of my paper is attached.

Brown, C. R., Life in the City United Methodist Church, July 11, 2019, ""Mission Border Hope, Eagle Pass, Texas: Of Loaves, Fishes, and Faith"," The United Methodist Church, Live presentation, church newspapers (e.g. www.lifeinthecityaustin.org), Austin, TX, United States. (July 11, 2019).

In the gospel story of the loaves and fishes LITC-1.docx

Additional Comments: This is an article and an oral presentation delivered to Methodist Churches concerning the work of Mission Border Hope in Eagle Pass, Texas, in which I took part in July 2019.

Brown, C. R., Texas State Philosophy Dept. Annual Space Settlement Symposium, ""Space Junk" and the Tragedy of the Commons," Texas State University Philosophy Department, Texas State, San Marcos, TX, United States. (September 27, 2018).

Brown, C. R., Symposium: Ethical Implications of the Commercial Use of Animals, "Ethical Implications of the EPA'Registration Rule for Confined Animal Feeding Operations," South Texas College of Law, Houston, TX. (April 20, 2012).

3. Consultancies:

4. Workshops:

5. Other Works not in Print:

a. Works "submitted" or "under review":

Journal Articles:

Brown, C. (Submitted / Under Review). "Insult to Injury: The Texas Supreme Court’s Circular Reasoning Denies Due Process to Waco and Future Downstream Complainants in Texas Commission on Environmental Quality v. Waco. Texas Tech Administrative Law Journal. (2023)

b. Works "in progress":

Journal Articles:

***Brown, C.R., Rangarajan, N., and Jalal, M.:

“Pedagogical Challenges to Legal Instruction in MPA Programs: An Empirical Study.”

INTRODUCTION

This article relies on a comprehensive study that co-author Mostafa Jalal conducted of the websites, statements of purpose, and syllabi of all NASPAA-accredited MPA programs in the United States and its territories to ascertain the manner in which each program integrated legal curriculum into public administration program. Brown and Rangarajan have completed and revised a 28-page daft of the article and are currently editing, revising, and documenting the article for publication in Teaching Public Administration. The article seeks to use this empirical study to provide a different kind of response than public administration educators have advanced thus far with regard to legal curriculum in their programs: at present, one camp in the public administration profession views all public administration curriculum as flowing from the fundamental precepts of public law, and understands all public administrators as responsible for comprehending and abiding by public law. Another camp, by contrast, views transparency and efficiency as the touchstones of public administration, with varying degrees of tolerance for public law instruction thrown in.

This article, by contrast, takes a lesson from the legal realists and posits that the manner in which the vast array pf public administration programs in NASPAA have decided to teach legal subjects to public administrators provides a practical roadmap to the various law-public administration programs. How the programs choose to synthesize legal subjects with public administration provides a concrete picture of the paradigms now predominant in America.

OVERVIEW

As early as 1927, public administrators engaged in public debate as to whether the emergig discipline of public administration should be centered around fundamental principles of administrative law or the most progressive iteration of management principles This disagreement over what should constitute the predominant paradigm for teaching public administration persists to the present

In American law schools during the twentieth century, legal educators asked questions about the relationship between law and the social sciences. Legal educators also asked what role the social sciences should play in their teaching.

In the legal context, however, the question concerned whether the social sciences should play a role in creating and teaching the law itself. This disagreement over the role of social sciences in law flowed from the school of thought called legal realism.

Even before legal realism, prominent legal scholars had indicated they did not view the law in strictly positivistic terms. Oliver Wendell Holmes – often seen as an early legal realist -- strongly preferred statutory law over judge-made common law. With respect to both, however, he recognized that law came into existence by accretion in response to concrete, fact-specific problems. His famous observation in The Common Law indicated that either judges or legislatures created law case-by-case as they sought to apply common law principles to discrete sets of unique facts over time: “the life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.”

The legal realists embraced Holmes’s axiom and went beyond it, arguing that the social sciences were necessary to arrive at an accurate definition of legal holdings. Karl Lewellyn, perhaps the most famous legal realist, came to share with other legal realists the belief that the method and substance of the social sciences should be used to understand law as an institution in a social context. The legal realists rejected the view that law was a deductive science. Llewellyn articulated the legal realist perspective in strong terms when he wrote that what judges, lawyers, and police officers decided to do to resolve disputes was really the law itself. (The Bramble Bush, p. 3).

Lewellyn and the legal realists did not simply rely on the social sciences to create more accurate descriptions of legal institutions and decisionmakers in a social context. When he was called upon to draft the Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.), Lewellyn famously sought to learn the conventions of merchants whose trades would be regulated by the new statutes and to harmonize the new code with actual commercial practice. Lewellyn also sought to draft the Code to be consonant with the practices of commercial attorneys who would rely on the law and the courts that would hear disputes under it.

Legal Realism -- and subsequently the school called Law and Society-- both sought to understand law from outside the law, emphasizing the value of insights the social sciences had to offer. In Lewellyn’s view, for example, for example, empirical information about what those police, judges, and attorneys were actually doing with the law became relevant to understanding the law itself.

In public administration, the issue is not whether the findings of social science should augment the law itself and legal instruction, but the obverse: whether and how the law should augment a social science-based program. In order to help answer this question, this article follows Lewellyn’s advice and example by gathering empirical data to provide insight into actual, differing, concrete visions of legal instruction in the context of public administration education.

In taking its cue from legal realism, this article departs from the existing secondary literature that addresses legal curriculum in public administration programs. Existing literature approaches this question in in normative terms. Seldom do these articles delve with any degree of detail into the current state of legal instruction that universities have developed to help MPA students develop specific competencies like those recommended by NASPAA. This article examines all of the NASPAA accredited programs to fill that gap.

Brown, C. R. (Submitted December 2022). “Citizen Rulemaking Petitions: The Conundrum of ‘Direct Democracy’ in Executive Branch Agencies, and the Necessity of Providing a Remedy for a Right: A Plea for States to Adopt a Judicial Review Provision.

Additional Comments: this article was submitted in 2023 to the Texas Tech Administrative Law Journal after revision; I am awaiting a response. The following is a summary of the revised article:

OVERVIEW

A lesser-known provision in the federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA) is creates a petition mechanism through which any interested party can request an agency to issue, amend, or repeal a rule (Section 553(e)). Such petitions are sometimes referred to as 553(e) petitions, petitions for rulemaking, petitions for reconsideration, administrative petitions, or citizens’ petitions. The APA petition mechanism is a potentially efficient (and arguably underused) means for an individual or stakeholder to call on an agency to take a particular action: “Each agency shall give an interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule” (5 U.S.C. §553(e)). The rulemaking petition affords citizens a direct mechanism with which to challenge the priorities of an agency by injecting a citizen-authored rule onto the priority list of rules the agency is charged with adopting through the notice and comment process. The right conferred by the APA in this regard is something citizens do not have in Congress or a state legislature: the ability not only to participate but to directly formulate agency rules that are in many ways tantamount to law. Even more unique about the petition for rulemaking is that Congress provided citizens with a legal remedy—judicial review of the agency’s decision to deny the petition under the arbitrary and capricious standard. (5 U.S.C. §702). By contrast, state rulemaking provisions seldom provide the judicial remedy in the event the right is denied. The model act that many states have adopted, § 3-117 of the 1981 version of the Model State Administrative Procedure Act, is silent as to any remedy for a denied rulemaking petition. Texas has adopted the language of the Model Act in section 2001.021 of the Texas Government Code. The fundamental purpose of the rulemaking petition is to provide a means by which citizens –whether individuals, public interest nonprofits, or corporations—can challenge an agency’s priorities and offer a competing vision.

Observers like Cornelius Kerwin have pointed out that high levels of participation in the notice and comment phase of federal rulemaking reflects an intense degree of citizen interest and participation in influencing nondemocratic agency policy: an intensely democratic phenomenon forms part of a nondemocratic agency decisionmaking process. The petition for rulemaking presents a similar contradiction. It affords a remarkable degree of direct participation in the rulemaking process that can disrupt agency priorities and even the substance of policy. While it may seem peculiar to invoke direct democracy in the context of agency rulemaking, the right to petition for rule making really does constitute a democratizing mechanism in the federal bureaucracy roughly analogous to direct democracy mechanisms in the legislative branch. Further, this article will urge that the availability of judicial review as a remedy for rejected federal rulemaking petitions enables the federal process to perform a meaningful democratic function. If one can imagine a bill of rights as what one German fascist legal theorist called a “Gesamtentscheidung”—a collective political decision of the people, but without an individual judicial remedy for a citizen whose rights were actually violated by a unit of government— one can imagine the tremendous difference between federal and state rulemaking petitions.

ARGUMENT

The fundamental purpose of the rulemaking petition is to provide a means by which citizens –whether individuals, public interest nonprofits, or corporations—can challenge an agency’s priorities and offer a competing vision.

Starting in 1946 with the passage of the federal Administrative Procedure Act, citizens could also petition federal agencies to initiate rulemaking proceedings. Section 553(e) of the Federal Administrative Act provides that “[e] ach agency shall give an interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule.” A critical component of the federal citizen rulemaking petition is the right to seek judicial review if the agency refuses to instigate the rulemaking: Section 702 of the Act provides in part that “[a] person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action within the meaning of a relevant statute, is entitled to judicial review thereof.” Federal courts have construed an agency’s refusal to instigate a citizen rulemaking as an “agency action” under this provision. Further, federal courts have concluded that the federal citizen rulemaking petition waives the agency’s sovereign immunity from suit and enables citizens whose rulemaking petition has been denied to seek judicial review of that denial in federal court. That is, the right has a corresponding remedy.

One cannot overestimate the importance that judicial review can play for citizens who seek to initiate a rulemaking in a federal agency. Just one example underscores the role that federal courts can play when an agency refuses to initiate a rulemaking that is both consistent with its enabling statute and in the public interest. In Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), the United States Supreme Court concluded that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it refused to initiate a rulemaking to determine whether greenhouse gases were subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act as air pollutants that constituted a public endangerment from mobile sources of pollution. Had federal law not enabled citizens to seek judicial review of the EPA’s refusal to initiate the rulemaking, the United States would not have enacted national policies to decrease greenhouse gas emissions.

By contrast, state laws establishing administrative procedure seldom afford citizens judicial review. The states have created a right to lodge an administrative statein a citizen’s ability to petition for rulemaking but have afforded that citizen no remedy in the event that an agency refuses the petition.

State statutes enacting parallel provisions to the federal Administrative Procedures Act also provided for citizen-initiated rulemaking. Under § 3-117 of the 1981 version of the Model State Administrative Procedure Act, any person may petition an agency requesting the adoption of a rule. Each agency shall prescribe by rule the form of the petition and the procedure for its submission, consideration, and disposition. The agency shall either:

•deny the petition in writing, stating its reasons therefore;
•initiate rule-making proceedings in accordance with this Chapter, or
•if otherwise lawful, adopt a rule; within 60 days after submission of a petition.
This act has provided several dozen states with a model for enacting a provision to enable citizens to petition for rulemaking.

The model act left it unclear, however, whether citizens have the right to seek judicial review if the state agency refuses to initiate the rulemaking process. The Texas Administrative Procedure Act contains section 101.021, for example, which specifies a process for citizen rulemaking provisions but says nothing about judicial review if the agency rejects the rulemaking:

Section 5: Petition to consider
Sec. 2001.021. PETITION FOR ADOPTION OF RULES. (a) An interested person by petition to a state agency may request the adoption of a rule.
(b) A state agency by rule shall prescribe the form for a petition under this section and the procedure for its submission, consideration, and disposition. If a state agency requires signatures for a petition under this section, at least 51 percent of the total number of signatures required must be of residents of this state.
(c) Not later than the 60th day after the date of submission of a petition under this section, a state agency shall:
(1) deny the petition in writing, stating its reasons for the denial; or
(2) initiate a rulemaking proceeding under this subchapter.
(d) For the purposes of this section, an interested person must be:
(1) a resident of this state;
(2) a business entity located in this state;
(3) a governmental subdivision located in this state; or
(4) a public or private organization located in this state that is not a state agency.
Although section 101.021 of the Texas Administrative Procedure Act remains silent as to whether citizens can seek judicial review of an agency’s decision to reject a rulemaking, the Texas Water Code explicitly authorizes judicial review of actions that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) takes. Section 6.241 of the Texas Water Code provides for judicial review of entire categories of actions by the Texas Water Commission, now subsumed under the TCEQ:
(a)A person affected by a ruling, order, decision, or other act of the board may file a petition to review, set aside, modify, or suspend the act of the board.
(b) A person affected by a ruling, order, or decision of the board must file his petition within 30 days after the effective date of the ruling, order, or decision. A person affected by an act other than a ruling, order, or decision must file his petition within 30 days after the date the board performed the act.
(c) Orders, decisions, or other actions of the board pursuant to Subchapters E and F of Chapter 16 and to Chapter 17 of this code are not subject to appeal.
Chapter 16, subchapter E (sections 16.131 through 16.144) pertains to the “Acquisition and Development of Facilities.” Chapter 16 subchapter F (sections 16.181 through 16.198) pertains to the “Sale or Lease of Facilities.” Chapter 17 pertains to “Public Funding” and contains provisions that apply both to the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) and the TCEQ.

Similarly, section 5.351 of the Texas Water Code provides for judicial review from any TCEQ action:
(a) A person affected by a ruling, order, decision, or other act of the commission may file a petition to review, set aside, modify, or suspend the act of the commission.
(b) A person affected by a ruling, order, or decision of the commission must file his petition within 30 days after the effective date of the ruling, order, or decision. A person affected by an act other than a ruling, order, or decision must file his petition within 30 days after the date the commission performed the act.
(c) Notwithstanding Subsection (b), a person affected by a ruling, order, or decision on a matter delegated to the executive director under Section 5.122 or other law may, after exhausting any administrative remedies, file a petition to review, set aside, modify, or suspend the ruling, order, or decision not later than the 30th day after:
(1) the effective date of the ruling, order, or decision; or
(2) if the executive director's ruling, order, or decision is appealed to the commission as authorized by Section 5.122(b) or other law, the earlier of:
(A) the date the commission denies the appeal;or
(B) the date the appeal is overruled by operation of law in accordance with commission rules.
Under the interpretive maxim “in pari materia”, a court should read Texas APA section 101.021 and Texas Water Code sections 6.241 and 5.351 alongside each other to determine whether citizens who petition the TCEQ to initiate a rulemaking have the right to seek judicial review if the agency refuses the rule. Conspicuously, Texas Water Code section 6.241 waives the TCEQ’s sovereign immunity for any action the agency takes unless it falls under the above-described sections of the Water Code in Chapters 16 or 17. The Austin Court of Appeal has ruled in a manner that would prevent my daughter from reading

In Texas Commission on Environmental Quality v. Bonser-Lain, et al., No. 03-12-00555-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Jul. 23, 2014), citizens had not petitioned the TCEQ to initiate a rulemaking under Chapter 16 or 17 of the Texas Water Code. Instead, a group of individuals filed a petition with TCEQ requesting that it adopt rules aimed at limiting greenhouse-gas emissions from fossil fuels in Texas. The district court agreed to hear the case –implicitly agreeing that section 5.351 of the Water Code waived sovereign immunity to appeal the denied administrative rulemaking-- but ruled in favor of the TCEQ on the merits.
TCEQ appealed despite prevailing in the district court.

The Austin Court of Appeals agreed to hear the case and explicitly held that no waiver of sovereign immunity existed for the district court to hear the case in the first instance: The State and its agencies could not be sued absent an express waiver of sovereign immunity. The district court had lacked jurisdiction because the Legislature’s failure to include a provision for judicial review in the APA, termed “deliberate silence,” did not demonstrate its intent to allow judicial review of agency decisions denying petitions for rulemaking.

The Austin Court of Appeals recognized that Texas courts have long held that a party who obtains a favorable judgment may not appeal the judgment merely to attack findings and conclusions with which it does not agree. However, the Court recognized that, while the judgment of the district court appears favorable to TCEQ, the district court could only have reviewed TCEQ’s decision after it concluded it had jurisdiction to do so: “In rejecting the Commission’s plea to the jurisdiction, the district court necessarily concluded that section 5.351 of the Texas Water Code operated as a waiver of sovereign immunity.” See Tex. Comm’n on Envtl. Quality v. Bonser-Lain, et al., No. 03-12-00555-CV, at 6.

The Austin Court of Appeals noted that, under principles of collateral estoppel, the TCEQ might have been precluded from relitigating sovereign immunity –a jurisdictional issue—with regard to citizen rulemaking petitions in subsequent proceedings. TCEQ argued that neither the APA nor section 5.351 of the Texas Water Code allows for judicial review because the Legislature has not waived immunity. The “pivotal issue” for the Court of Appeals, therefore, was whether the Legislature waived immunity either by statute or legislative resolution. The Austin Court of Appeals agreed.

In ruling against the petitioners in Bonser-Lain, the Austin Court of Appeals appears to have rejected the principle of in pari materia and also demanded talismanic language to recognize a waiver of sovereign immunity. Conspicuously, neither section 6.241 nor 5.351 of the Texas Water Code contains the magic words the Austin Court of Appeals appeared to demand: “sovereign immunity barring judicial review of agency decisions under this provision is hereby waived.” Apparently, the Bonser Lain decision rejected not only judicial review of citizen rulemaking provisions under the APA, but also the other, varied forms of judicial review of agency decisions that the Water Code explicitly authorizes. Another, more fundamental principle of statutory construction applies here: The Legislature is never presumed to do useless or foolish things. According to Bonser Lain, the Legislature created explicit provisions for the judicial review of TCEQ decisions and then deliberately undid those provisions by failing to include the talismanic language regarding sovereign immunity.

Given the strict interpretation of sovereign immunity that the Austin Court of Appeals has adopted with regard to citizen rulemaking petitions, a more moderate approach by the Texas Supreme Court seems unlikely. My article urges that the Texas Legislature should amend the Texas Administrative Procedure Act to enable citizens to seek judicial review of agency decisions to deny rulemaking petitions. Such an amendment would increase public access to agency decision making in a state where the majority of decisions affecting the public interest occur in the executive branch. Moreover, judicial review would also be consistent with basic principles of Texas law, which emphasizes the right of citizens to seek judicial review of their grievances.

Petitions for rulemaking filed subsequent to the Bonser Lain decision demonstrate the way in a rulemaking petition law and sought to avoid the inevitability the remedy of judicial review has no hope of becoming a rule if it advances an important objective in the public interest and in accordance with statute but contrary to the policy priorities of the those elected officials that control agency policy. The so-called “Pristine Streams Petition” would have protected stream segments in the Texas hill country with exceptionally high water quality from the location of new wastewater treatment plants in their proximity. The pristine streams petition was consistent with federal and state law and requested the TCEQ to adopt a new rule to prohibit the permitting of the discharge of treated domestic wastewater effluent to certain “stream segments” and their “drainages”, often referred to herein as “pristine streams.” Despite widespread support for the rule, 1,200 comments overwhelmingly in support of the rule, and empirical data demonstrating that wastewater treatment plants would degrade pristine stream streams, the TCEQ commissioners rejected the petition on the basis that the existing environmental review of wastewater treatment permit applications was adequate to protect such streams. This conclusion was not subject to judicial review to determine if it was arbitrary and capricious because section 2001.021 of the Government Code does not provide such a remedy. This petition exemplifies the fundamental problem with an administrative rulemaking petition without a judicial review remedy: the agency is at liberty to read the record selectively to maintain existing agency practice.

Brown, C. R. (In revision, not yet resubmitted): Shelby v. Holder, Preclearance, and Special Purpose District Governance of Natural Resources. Summary of Article Below.

Additional Comments: Summary of this article, which I am revising for resubmission depending on the outcome of Moore v. Harper, the “independent theory of the legislature” case, heard on December 6, 2022 by the United States Supreme Court.
This article explores changes to local natural resource governance as a result of the United States Supreme Court Voting Rights Act decision Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013) (Shelby). In order to understand how Shelby might affect the governance of common pool resources, a brief explanation of the Voting Rights Act and holding in Shelby are necessary.

Congress passed the Voting Rights Act in 1965 to make effective the voting rights protections enshrined in the United States Constitution after the Civil War – inter alia, in the 14th and 15th Amendments-- that state and local governments in the south had subsequently frustrated through Jim Crow laws. The Voting Rights Act served as a mechanism for citizens or the Department of Justice (DOJ) to challenge state or local governments that enacted laws or policies denying American citizens the equal right to vote based on race.
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act required all jurisdictions in states of the old south –along with certain others-- to submit any proposed changes in state or local voting procedures to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) or a federal district court in D.C. they went into effect. The DOJ or court, in turn would review the proposed change to ensure it did not harm minority voters, preventing discrimination before it happened. This process –called “preclearance” --applied to all or part of 16 states.

The Brennan Center, a university voting rights research institution, observed just before the Supreme Court decided Shelby: “Section 5 is an essential and proven tool. Although progress has been made since the Voting Rights Act passed in 1965, voting discrimination still persists. Between 1982 and 2006 (when Congress overwhelmingly renewed the law), the Voting Rights Act blocked more than 1,000 proposed discriminatory voting changes. Without Section 5’s protection, these changes would have gone into effect and harmed minority voters.” The Brennan Center continues:
Section 5 is still needed to prevent and address real and continuing threats to Americans’ right to vote. States continue to enact laws to restrict minority voting access. Section 5 is a proven remedy to protect voters. In 2012, it blocked a highly-restrictive voter ID laws in Texas and a law in Florida that eliminated early voting days, which would have made it more difficult for hundreds of thousands of minority voters to cast a ballot.
Despite proponents of Section 5 preclearance like the Brennan Center, the Shelby Court observed that data from the vast majority of jurisdictions subject to preclearance failed to demonstrate the kinds of voting rights abuses that the Voting Rights Act required to trigger Section 5 protections. Justice Ginsberg disagreed with this analysis, but the majority held that section 5 triggering mechanisms no longer existed in the states of the old south and elsewhere and removed these states from preclearance.

In general, state statutes and local ordinances passed shortly after Shelby indicate that the jurisdictions subject to preclearance have persisted in creating obstacles to the principle of One Person, One Vote.
More specifically, however, one must ask whether Shelby’s rejection of Section 5 Preclearance in the jurisdictions that comprised the Confederacy (plus others showing retrogression) could have an impact on special purpose districts that govern natural resources like water supplies. My analysis starts with Supreme Court decision like Salyer v. Tulare Water District, 410 U.S. 719 (U.S. 1973), which held that special purpose water districts governing a single resource did not have to conform to the One Person, One Vote standard.

Salyer and similar decisions reasoned that units of government whose constituents constitute permanent majority and minority user groups call for different considerations than a general purpose unit of government, whose constituents shift into different majority-minority groupings depending on which of a broad range of services the governmental unit is considering. According to Salyer, the Voting Rights Act and the legal decisions that followed sought to protect the constituents of such general purpose governments from invidious discrimination. Special purpose districts, by contrast, have one particular form of discriminatory voting built into them and one permanent minority that will suffer from the discrimination: two competing uses of a single water body and two groups that avail themselves of the competing uses, one numerically superior to the other. In such situations, reasoned the Supreme Court, the “counter majoritarian protection” for the permanent minority must consist of a voting scheme that departs from One Person, One Vote in order to provide a disproportionately strong voice to the otherwise-victimized minority.

My article questions the reasoning of Salyer and its progeny in light of one particular case history: The Voting Rights Act Preclearance process that resulted in the governing board of the Edwards aquifer Authority (EAA) in Central Texas. Although the EAA is larger and more complex than the type of special purpose district analyzed in Salyer – neither the Justice Department nor the Texas Legislature referred explicitly to Salyer in their negotiations to formulate the EAA board – the considerations that allowed the EAA to depart from Voting Rights Act principles clearly drew from the logic of Salyer and its progeny. My article acknowledges the basic problem that Salyer addressed but argues that the liberty to depart from the One Person, One Vote principle it created represented a dangerous precedent for subsequent efforts to formulate configurations of governance for local boards charged with regulating natural resources; the article uses the EAA case history to illustrate this argument.

My article then returns to Shelby to suggest that, whereas the EAA board underwent Preclearance scrutiny because it was located in an Old South jurisdiction—Texas-- the same process today would take place entirely under the aegis of the Texas Legislature. The history of the EAA board clearly indicates that the state legislature would have departed more drastically from One Person, One Vote than the Department of Justice did when Section 5 Preclearance was still allowed. The article concludes that the special purpose district exception that Salyer created, coupled with the elimination of Section 5 Preclearance in Shelby, virtually guarantees that governance of natural resources in Old South jurisdictions will be formulated with virtually no reference whatsoever to One Person, One Vote. The likely result: Salyer’s counter majoritarian impulse to protect user groups in the permanent minority may well swallow the basic Constitutional principle of equal presentation and result in the unjustified deprivation of rights for majority user groups comprised of racial or ethnic minorities.

I am revising an earlier version of this article and expect to submit it to a journal by Fall 2024.

Brown, C. (In Preparation; Not Yet Submitted). Aransas Project v. Shaw: The Fifth Circuit’s Myopic Reading of the Endangered Species Act and the Continued Decline of Texas Estuaries.

Brown, C. (In Preparation; Not Yet Submitted). Who Decides The “State of Exception : How the JustizStaat Used Schmittian Logic to Undermine the Voting Rights Act.

Brown, C. (In Preparation; Not Yet Submitted). An Avulsive Decision: How the Texas Supreme Court’s Harmful Beach Decision Also Harms the Public Interest in Navigable Streams.

c. Other Works Not in Print:

"Inklings" Presentation to Political Science Faculty at Texas States:

Brown, C. R. (Speaker), "Arbitrary and Capricious: Pruitt and the EPA," Political Science Department, San Marcos, TX, United States. (November 7, 2017).

C. Scholarly / Creative Grants and Contracts:

1. Funded External Grants and Contracts:

2. Submitted, but not Funded, External Grants and Contracts:

Brown, Christopher Ralph. Two-day Professional Grant Development Workshop, Grant Training Center. (Funded: February 7-8, 2023).

Additional Comments: These are the dates of a workshop I will attend on grant applications and development.

Brown, Christopher Ralph. Workshop for Applying for Federal Grants, Grant Training Center. (Funded: January 20, 2018 - January 21, 2018). Grant.

Additional Comments: These are the dates of the workshop I attended to learn more about applying for grants.

3. Funded Internal Grants and Contracts:

4. Submitted, but not Funded, Internal Grants and Contracts:

D. Scholarly / Creative Fellowships, Awards, Honors:

Award / Honor Recipient: National First Place Winner, Cormac McCarthy parody fiction writing contest: "Not Cormac".

January 1, 1999

Award / Honor Recipient: Presidential Management Internship Program: accelerated honors program for federal agencies.

January 1, 1995

Award / Honor Recipient: International Parliamentary Debate Championship, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.

January 1, 1993

Additional Comments: Lyndon Baines Johnson School of Public Affairs. First place winner (app. 50 competitors)

Award / Honor Recipient: Gibbs and Ratliff Endowed Moot Court Competition, University of Texas School of Law.

January 1, 1992

Additional Comments: First place team (102 teams competing) and second place brief

Award / Honor Recipient: Gibbs and Ratliff Endowed Moot Court Competition.

January 1, 1991

Additional Comments: Quarterfinalist team (100 teams competing)

Award / Honor Recipient: Phi Beta Kappa (Academic Honor Society).

May 1, 1986

Award / Honor Recipient: Beta Beta Beta: (National Biological Honor Society).

May 1, 1984

E. Scholarly / Creative Professional Development Activities Attended:

Continuing Education Program, “Water Law 101,” Texas Bar Association -San Antonio (February 22, 2023)

Continuing Education Program, “The Changing Face of Water Law 2023”, Texas Bar Association -San Antonio (February 23-24, 2023)

Additional comments: These are live courses I attended in February 2023.

Continuing Education Program, “Opening Statements and Closing Arguments,” University of Texas School of Law, Austin. (April 26, 2022).

Continuing Education Program, 2021 Advanced Administrative Law eConference	,” University of Texas School of Law, (February 26, 2022).

Continuing Education Program, “Renewable Energy Law Essentials,” University of Texas School of Law, (February 26, 2022).

Continuing Education Program, “Everyday Strategies for Avoiding Professional Misconduct, ”University of Texas School of Law, (February 26, 2022)

Continuing Education Program, “Hot Topics for Avoiding Professional Liability,” University of Texas School of Law, (February 26, 2022).

Additional comments: These were online self -study courses I completed in 2022.

Continuing Education Program, "Continuing legal education in administrative law," Texas Bar Association, Austin. (December 12, 2021 – January 10, 2022).

Additional Comments: This was an online self-study course I completed in December 2021-January 2022.

Conference Attendance, "E Supplement to 14th Annual Administrative Law Conference," University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (January 14, 2020).

Continuing Education Program, "Hot Topics in Ethics: Pro Bono Opportunities, Lobbying,," University of Texas Law School, Austin. (January 14, 2020).

Continuing Education Program, "Promise of Desalination in Texas," University of Texas Law School, Austin, United States. (December 27, 2019).

Conference Attendance, "14TH ANNUAL ADVANCED ADMINISTRATIVE LAW SEMINAR," State Bar of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (August 15, 2019 - August 16, 2019).

Continuing Education Program, "Changing Face of Water Law," Texas State Bar. (February 22, 2019 - February 23, 2019).

Seminar, "Environmental Law," Lewis and Clark School of Law, Portland, OR, United States. (May 20, 2018 - June 2, 2018).

Additional Comments: This was a summer school course at the Lewis and Clark Law School that provided an intensive survey of federal environmental law ona broad range of statutes.

Conference Attendance, "The Environment under Trump," Lewis and Clark School of Law, Portland, OR, United States. (May 7, 2018 - May 9, 2018).

Additional Comments: At the invitation of the environmental law faculty at the Lewis and Clark Law School (Lewis and Clark) in Portland, Oregon, I participated in a two day seminar entitled “Trump and the Environment,” which explored the extensive repeal of environmental protection rules the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has undertaken since Trump took office under the Clean Air Act (CAA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and related statutes. The seminar also drew on practicing attorneys who had witnessed the Trump EPA’s reductions in environmental enforcement efforts, and the ways the current EPA has made it more difficult for citizens to enforce their rights under environmental protection statutes. The seminar also discussed the changes at the Department of the Interior under Trump. With regard to all environmental and conservation agencies the seminar focused on the Trump administration’s efforts to repeal efforts to combat climate change and the ways these agencies have played a role in the administration’s renewed support for the fossil fuel industry.

Continuing Education Program, "Hydraulic Fracturing: Regulatory Developments/Land Use/Water," Texas Bar Association. (April 22, 2018).

Continuing Education Program, "Water Rights 101: 2017," State Bar of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (March 4, 2018).

Continuing Education Program, "18th Annual Changing Face of Water Rights," State Bar of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (February 24, 2017 - February 26, 2017).

Additional Comments: This course aided in the creation of the course on Texas water law and policy I offered in Fall 2017. I also recruited guest speakers for the course at this conference.

Continuing Education Program, "Texas Water Law Institute," University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (November 2, 2016 - November 4, 2016).

Continuing Education Program, University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (September 1, 2016 - September 2, 2016).

Continuing Education Program, "Texas Water Law Institute," University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (November 2, 2015 - November 4, 2015).

Continuing Education Program, University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (September 1, 2015 - September 2, 2015).

Continuing Education Program, "Texas Water Law Institute," University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (November 2, 2014 - November 4, 2014).

Conference Attendance, "Climate Reality Project International Conference," Climate Reality Project, Johannesburg, South Africa. (March 13, 2014 - March 16, 2014).

Additional Comments: Invited to attend climate change conference. Lectures and training.

Continuing Education Program, "Texas Water Law Institute," University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (November 2, 2013 - November 4, 2013).

Continuing Education Program, University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (September 1, 2013 - September 3, 2013).

Continuing Education Program, University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (September 1, 2013 - September 3, 2013).

Continuing Education Program, "Texas Water Law Institute," University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (November 2, 2012 - November 4, 2012).

Continuing Education Program, University of Texas, Travis, TX, United States. (September 1, 2012 - September 3, 2012).

Conference Attendance, "Symposium: Ethical Implications of the Commercial Use of Animals," South Texas College of Law, Houston, TX, United States. (April 20, 2012 - April 22, 2012).

Additional Comments: Presented paper on Clean Water Act issues related to confined animal feeding.operations.

Continuing Education Program, "Texas Water Law Institute," University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (November 2, 2011 - November 4, 2011).

Continuing Education Program, University of Texas, Travis, TX, United States. (September 1, 2011 - September 2, 2011).

Continuing Education Program, "Texas Water Law Institute," University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (November 2, 2010 - November 4, 2010).

Continuing Education Program, University of Texas, Travis, TX, United States. (September 1, 2010 - September 2, 2010).

Additional Comments: Coursework completed over birth year. Full documentation available.

Continuing Education Program, "Texas Water Law Institute," University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (November 2, 2009 - November 4, 2009).

Conference Attendance, "American Association of Paralegal Education (AAfPE) National Conference," AAfPE, Multnomah, OR, United States. (October 31, 2009 - November 3, 2009).

Continuing Education Program, "Continuing Legal Education," University of Texas, Travis, TX, United States. (September 1, 2009 - September 2, 2009).

Additional Comments: Continuing legal education completed over course of birth year. Full documentation available.

Continuing Education Program, "Texas Water Law Institute," University of Texas, Austin, TX, United States. (November 2, 2008 - November 4, 2008).

Continuing Education Program, "Continuing Legal Education," University of Texas, Travis, TX, United States. (September 1, 2008 - September 3, 2008).

Additional Comments: Coursework completed in the duration of one's birth year. Full documentation available through University of Texas/ Texas Bar Association.

F. Media Recognition:

IV. SERVICE

A. Institutional

1. University:

Title IX Hearings Coordinator, Title IX Trainings and Hearings. (March 3, 2021 - Present). I participated in a week-long training to serve as a decision maker and have served on two panels. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits discrimination in any educational program that receives federal funding.

Additional Comments: Activities are ongoing.

Member, Legal Studies Program Committee. Participate in committee meetings and decision making in program. (2010 - Present).

Member, Public Administration Program Committee. Participate in committee meetings and decision making in program. (2010 - Present).

Co-Chair, Philosophy Dept. Annual Space Settlement Symposium. (September 27, 2018).

Kanon Notes-1.docx

Additional Comments: I helped to organize this event and gave one of three keynote speeches. I discussed the Tragedy of the Commons in the context of the increasing quantity of human "junk" orbiting earth.

Graduate Advisor, Faculty Advisor for Texas State Chapter of Water Aid. (2011 - 2015).

Participant, Committee to Establish Phi Beta Kappa Hill Country Alumni Chapter and Phi Beta Kappa Chapter at Texas State University. (2012).

Participant, Texas State University Symposium, (2012).

Participant, Infusing Sustainability into the Curriculum Workshop. (2010).

Participant, Program for Excellence in Teaching and Leaming. (2007 - 2008).

Additional Comments: Extensive series of workshops meeting once a month; administered by Dr. Beth

Wuest.

Participant, "A River Runs Through Us" Workshop. (2007).

Additional Comments: Presentation and tour by Andrew Sansom, Executive Director, River Systems

Institute

Participant, Join the Discourse Event" panelist in discussion of Central Texas Water Issues. (November 1, 2007).

2. College:

Member, Nomination of David Gaultney for Distinguished Alumni Award. (August 9, 2017).

Additional Comments: I drafted the letter nominating Justice Gaultney for the Distinguished Alumni award.

3. Department/School:

Evaluator of MPA Scholarship Applicants (Fall 2023).

Read and revised the MPA exit survey for MPA graduates to evaluate the program. Fall 2023.

Prepared and taught two-night MPA writing seminar entitled “Effective Writing: The Cornerstone of Academic and Career Advancement” at the outset of each semester. (September 2023) The following is a summary of the course:

We had 41 students one evening and 38 the second.

The first night addressed studies that demonstrate the central role of writing skills as a determinant of professional success, followed by the twelve most common grammatical errors. We got through nine of them in the time allotted and I assigned readings to cover the remaining three; I also sent out a grammar review exercise.

The second night we focused on composition and style; we finished about two-thirds of the material with door prizes for students who could identify the photographs of famous fiction writers that appeared on the PowerPoint. (Everybody got Mark Twain and Dr. Seuss; no one got Tolstoy).

We were on Zoom so it was hard to gauge the students' response, but there were indications that people were paying attention: I got five questions over the course of both nights regarding writing problems students had encountered. Also, a good number of people participated in the identification of famous writers. Seven won and twice that guessed.

I agree with Nandhini that we should continue to do this seminar in subsequent semesters, and that we should either make each session longer or add another night to accommodate the material. The material I outlined was pared down and we still came up short of time.

Created and prepared course materials and presentation for two-night MPA writing seminar entitled “Effective Writing: Cornerstone of Academic and Career Advancement,” to be held January 30-31, 2023 (December 15, 2022 -January 13, 2023).

Authored article for Public Affairs Magazine: “The Equitable Dimension of Environmental and Administrative Law: A Profile of Public Administration Faculty Member Christopher Brown” (October 10, 2022-November 9, 2022)

Edited and revised Public Administration Diversity Plan for NASPAA accreditation ( November 8, 2022- January 7, 2023).

Drafted universal competencies for Public Law for NASPAA accreditation, (November 8, 2022- January 7, 2023).

Member, Faculty Search Committee (Constitutional Law Tenure Track Position: second search) (October 2022-present).

Member, Faculty Search Committee (Public Administration Professor of Practice Position)(April 10, 2022-June 20, 2022)

Member, Non -Thesis Comprehensive Examination Subcommittee (Revision of Guidelines for Written and Oral Components of MPA Comprehensive Examination) (July-August 2022)

Member , Public Administration Committee

Member, Observation Policies Committee. (November 1, 2021 - Present).

Additional Comments: Committee activities are ongoing.

Member, Faculty Search Committee (Constitutional Law Tenure Track Position: first search). (September 9, 2021 – February 15, 2022) and (October 2023-present).

Additional Comments: Committee activities are ongoing. I participated in the Zoom interview process that produced the final three candidates now under review and will participate in each candidate’s teaching and research presentations, and interviews with the committee in the coming weeks.

Undergraduate Advisor, Bobcat Day. (September 1, 2015 - Present).

Attended event, Dr. H.W. Perry: The Supreme Court of the U.S. (October 7, 2019).

Co-Chair, “Common Experience” and “Discourse in Democracy” Event: “Echoes of Flint: Water Quality Threats to Texas Cities.”. (September 24, 2019).

It Can’t Happen Here CB-1.pptx

Additional Comments: Amy Hardberger, Professor and Assistant Provost at Saint Mary's Law School, and Jenna Walker, State Director of the Texas Stream Team at the Meadows Center, served on the panel with me. I recruited both of these speakers and prepared them for the presentation; I also made a presentation on contamination of Texas groundwater for the approximately 85 participants. My power point presentation is attached.

Meet Your Professors. (September 10, 2019).

Additional Comments: Gave personal introduction and explained courses

Attended event., Wifred McClay: The Tocquevillian Moment, and Ours. (April 5, 2019).

Member, Personnel Search Committee: Comparativist Political Scientist. (May 1, 2018 - March 1, 2019).

Additional Comments: I was actively involved in screening the applications, recommending applicants, attending meetings with the committee, and conducting Skype interviews. I became less involved in the latter part of the process in December because of family issues.

Attended event, Dr. Dawn Teele's Presentation on Women's Suffrage. (February 6, 2019).

Graduate Advisor, University of Texas at Austin "Master the Possibilities" Fair (Graduate School Fair). (October 20, 2017 - October 21, 2017).

Additional Comments: I sponsored the table for the M.P.A. and Legal Studies programs at the University of Texas graduate school fair and spoke with prospective applicants to our programs

Chair, Department-Wide Barbecue Dinner and Movie on Texas Water Policy. (April 27, 2017).

Additional Comments: We did not have a huge turnout, but those who attended came from political science, aquatic biology, and geography departments.

Organizer, Guest Lecturer: Phil Durst, Employment Attorney. (October 1, 2015).

Representative, Political Science Department representative to Texas State Multicultural Affairs/Impact San Marcos Juneteenth Banquet. (2011).

Representative, Bobcat Days. Political Science Department representative and pre-law advisor for prospective Texas State students. (2009 - 2011).

Interviewee, "Join the Discourse Event" Taping and broadcast of "Meet the Professor" with Dr. Theodore Hindson on Future of Texas Water Policy. (November 1, 2007).

Participant, "Meet the Professors," Department of Political Science. (October 1, 2007).

B. Professional:

Pro Bono Legal Services through St. James Episcopal Church, Saint James Episcopal Church, Austin, TX, United States. (June 1, 2019 - Present).

Additional Comments: I have consulted with an attorney and priest named Jim Harrington, former chief counsel for the Texas Civil Rights Project, concerning opportunities for attorneys to provide pro bono counsel to applicants for aylum. On the basis of Jim's advice and the mission of the Episcopal Church, I have volunteered with American Gateways, a non-profit organization that assists asylum applicants. I am in the process of training and being assigned clients.

Member, Administrative Law Section and Environmental Law Section, Texas Bar, Austin, TX, United States. (February 19, 2017 - Present).

Member, National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). (2009 - Present).

Member, Louisiana Bar Association. (2004 - Present).

Member, Federal Bar. (1999 - Present).

Member, Texas Bar Association. (1999 - Present).

Reviewer / Referee, Nature Sustainability (Journal). (October 20, 2018 - December 1, 2018).

Additional Comments: I reviewed the Article entitled "Mapping Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations Using Deep Learning" (manuscript number NATSUSTAIN-18092127A), which cited an earlier article I had written on monitoring CAFOs.

Member, University of Texas Water Law Symposium. (2012).

Member, Texas Bar Association Conference: The Changing Face of Water Law. (January 1, 2008 - January 1, 2012).

Speaker, Texas Bar Association Conference: Suing and Defending Governmental Entities. (2010).

Member, Texas Bar Association Conference: Litigation. (April 1, 2010 - May 1, 2010).

Member, Texas Watershed Steward Program in Luling, Texas. (2008).

Speaker, Collaborative symposium: Climate Change in Texas. Represented National Wildlife Federation. (2008).

Speaker, Seminar: "Senate Bill 3: Freshwater for a Healthy San Antonio Bay.". (2008).

Additional Comments: Program focused on new state legislation to protectinstream flows in Texas

Rivers as well as sufficient freshwater flows to coastal estuaries. Seminar

provided information crucial to current Texas water law and environmental

policy

C. Community:

Co-Chair, Boy Scouts of America Troop 7414 Austin, Texas, Austin, TX. (December 5, 2021 - Present). I serve as Assistant Scout Master for boys at the Gus Garcia Middle School in Austin, Texas. Troop 7414 furthers diversity by enabling Hispanic youth to participate in scouting free of cost and on a bilingual basis. I underwent training to serve as a scout master and have supervised several bilingual camp outs.

Assistant Scout Master Troop 7414, Austin, Tx. Campouts and the Area Camporee Spring and Fall 2023.

Additional Comments: Assistant Scout Masters for Troop 7414 in Austin, Texas and serve on an ongoing basis at least one weekend per month.

Volunteer, Texas Stream Team, San Marcos, TX. (August 2018 - Present).

Additional Comments: I do volunteer work on an ongoing basis for the Texas Stream Team through Texas State for the City of San Marcos. I test water quality in the San Marcos River.

Member, Texas Master Naturalist, San Antonio, TX. (January 1, 2017 - Present).

Additional Comments: The Texas Master Naturalist requires extensive classroom time learning about the different dimensions of ecosystems in Texas and then requires 40 annual membership hours to remain a member: these hours could include serving as a tour guide at Texas state parks, or clearing brush from trail a state or local parks, or other outdoor service activities.

Climate Leader, Climate Reality Project. (2015 - Present).

Volunteer, Mission Border Hope, Eagle Pass, Texas, Eagle Pass, TX. (July 4, 2019).

In the gospel story of the loaves and fishes LITC-1.docx

Additional Comments: I helped members of Life in the City United Methodist Church process new asylum applicants and help them find transportation to their families' homes in the United States.
On return to Austin, I made presentations to local Methodist churches and encouraged others to volunteer with Mission Border Hope. My article/presentation is attached.

Volunteer, Natural Resources Defense Council. (January 1, 2007 - 2016).

Volunteer, Texas Masters Naturalists- Alamo Area, San Antonio, TX. (August 8, 2016 - November 9, 2016).

Additional Comments: I completed all of the coursework and part of the volunteer work to be designated as a Master Naturalist through the State of Texas.

The following is a description of the Master Naturalist Program and the Alamo Area Chapter:

The Alamo Area Chapter of the Texas Master Naturalist (AAMN) is a San Antonio volunteer organization that provides classroom instruction and field training for volunteers who focus on the preservation, conservation and restoration of the local area’s indigenous plants, animals and geological features of the region. The AAMN promotes ecological education for all ages. Over a ten week period, volunteers are trained by local experts in many scientific subjects including ecology, geology, climatology, botany and zoology. In return for this training, volunteers agree to take 8 hours of advanced training each year and give 40 hours of volunteer service annually to support the chapter’s goals

Volunteer, Manos de Cristo. (February 1, 2015 - June 1, 2015).

Additional Comments: I taught English speaking and writing to Spanish-speaking individuals.

Pro Bono legal work, Sierra Club, Austin, Texas Chapter. (January 1, 2007 - March 1, 2010).

D. Organization Memberships:

Climate Leader, Climate Reality Project. (2015 - Present).

Louisiana State Bar Association (LSBA). (May 1, 2005 - Present).

Additional Comments: To become and remain a member, one must complete a law degree, pass a background check and evaluation, sit for approximately sixteen hours of "continuing legal education" each year, and pay annual membership dues and occupation taxes. I remain a member but have been on inactive status since 2008.

Texas State Bar Association. (December 1, 1999 - Present).

Additional Comments: To become and remain a member, one must complete a law degree, pass a background check and evaluation, sit for approximately sixteen hours of "continuing legal education" each year, and pay annual membership dues and occupation taxes.

Phi Beta Kappa. (1986 - Present).

Additional Comments: I participated in the creation of a Texas State University Phi Beta Kappa

chapter in 2015.

Beta Beta Beta: (National Biological Honor Society). (1984 - Present).

Texas Master Naturalists. (August 15, 2016 - January 8, 2022).

Additional Comments: Intensive classroom, field work, and volunteering to acquire advanced knowledge of Texas ecology.

Saint James Episcopal Church (St. James). (June 1, 2005 - January 8, 2022).

Additional Comments: Member and participant in the ministry of the church.

E. Service Honors and Awards:

F. Service Grants and Contracts:

1. Funded External Service Grants and Contracts:

2. Submitted, but not Funded, External Service Grants and Contracts:

3. Funded Internal Service Grants and Contracts:

4. Submitted, but not Funded, Internal Service Grants and Contracts:

G. Service Professional Development Activities Attended: