Can a Texas Appraisal District Use ChatGPT and Other AI Tools?

Yes, but a district needs rules first. Texas has a new AI law that applies to governmental agencies, annual AI training is now required for local government staff, and some data an appraisal office holds is confidential by statute. The risk is less about the tool and more about what staff paste into it.

This post covers what TRAIGA requires of agencies, the training rule, the confidential data problem under Tax Code 22.27, and what a district AI policy should say.

What the Texas AI law requires of government agencies

The Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA, House Bill 149) took effect January 1, 2026. It applies to governmental agencies, with exceptions for hospital districts and institutions of higher education.

For a district, these parts matter most:

Disclosure. If an agency uses an AI system intended to interact with consumers, it must tell them before or at the time of the interaction. Greenberg Traurig's summary says the notice must be clear and conspicuous, in plain language and free of dark patterns, even when the AI use would be obvious. A chatbot on your website that answers property owners' questions is the plain example.

Social scoring. Governmental entities may not use AI to assign a social score to people based on their behavior or characteristics.

Biometrics. Governmental entities may not use AI to uniquely identify a specific person from biometric data without that person's consent.

Only the Texas Attorney General can enforce the law. The AG must give written notice and allow 60 days to cure a violation before acting. Civil penalties in the law run from $10,000 to $12,000 for a curable violation and $80,000 to $200,000 for one that cannot be cured, plus $2,000 to $40,000 per day for a continuing violation.

AI training is now required

Since September 1, 2025, House Bill 3512 has required local government employees and officials to complete a DIR-certified AI training program every year, in addition to cybersecurity training. If your staff are using AI tools, they already need that course.

The bigger issue: confidential appraisal data

Section 22.27 of the Texas Tax Code makes rendition statements, property reports and related attachments confidential. That includes income and expense information about a property. The statute limits access to appraisal office employees who appraise property, with listed exceptions such as the property owner, a court order, or certain government officials. Unauthorized disclosure is a Class B misdemeanor.

Now think about a common AI habit: an appraiser pastes a property owner's income and expense statement into a public AI chatbot and asks for a summary. That sends confidential data to a third party's servers. Whether that counts as a disclosure under Section 22.27 is a question for your attorney, and it is better answered before anyone does it than after.

Other kinds of data deserve the same caution, including personal information about property owners, and anything else your district treats as confidential.

What an AI policy for a district should say

Approved tools only. Publish a short list of tools staff may use and say everything else is off limits for district work. Check each vendor's terms on whether your inputs are used to train their models, where the data is stored and who can see it.

Data rules. Spell out what may never go into an AI tool, starting with Section 22.27 material and personal information.

People decide. Valuation decisions, exemption determinations and letters to property owners need a named staff member who reviews and owns the result. AI drafts; a person decides.

Disclosure for public-facing tools. If you run a chatbot or any AI that talks to the public, put the required notice in front of every user.

Training and records. Assign the certified AI course and keep completion records for DIR reporting.

Logging. Know who is using which tool. Use accounts you control, not personal ones.

Where to start

Ask your staff which AI tools they already use. Most districts find people are using something. Start the policy from that list, not from a blank page.

This post is general information and not legal advice. Have your attorney review your AI policy against TRAIGA and Section 22.27.

The bigger lesson

Staff will use AI whether or not the district has a policy. The safe path is approved tools on accounts you control, clear data rules and a person who owns every decision. A managed IT provider can set up those tools and the access controls around them, so the policy is enforced by the system and not just by memory.

safemode IT is a managed IT and cybersecurity provider based in Kyle, Texas, and we work with local government offices across Central Texas. If you want help setting up approved AI tools and the access controls around them, call 512-761-7652 or visit safemodeit.com.

Sources

• Greenberg Traurig, TRAIGA: Key Provisions of Texas' New Artificial Intelligence Governance Act
• Norton Rose Fulbright, The Texas Responsible AI Governance Act
• Texas Legislature, HB 3512 (89th Legislature) bill analysis
• GovTech, Texas formalizes certification standards for AI training programs
• Texas Tax Code, Section 22.27

Frequently asked questions

Last updated: October 6, 2026