BILL ANALYSIS

C.S.H.B. 3811

By: Jetton

Natural Resources

Committee Report (Substituted)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Under current law, the authorization for conservation and reclamation districts to hold board meetings by videoconference call depends on various factors, including whether the meeting is a regular or special board meeting, the size of the district, the immediacy of the board action required, and the difficulty in convening a quorum at one physical location. C.S.H.B. 3811 seeks to ease constraints and confusion relating to board meetings for conservation and reclamation districts by authorizing such a district to hold any regular or special board meeting by videoconference if a board member presiding over the meeting is physically present at one location of the meeting that is open to the public during the open portions of the meeting.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT

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

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.

ANALYSIS

C.S.H.B. 3811 amends the Water Code to authorize the board of directors of an applicable conservation and reclamation district, including a groundwater conservation district, to hold any regular or special meeting by videoconference call if a board member presiding over the meeting is physically present at one location of the meeting that is open to the public during the open portions of the meeting. The bill clarifies that this authorization applies notwithstanding certain provisions of state open meetings law relating to videoconference calls.

EFFECTIVE DATE

On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2023.

COMPARISON OF INTRODUCED AND SUBSTITUTE

While C.S.H.B. 3811 may differ from the introduced in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following summarizes the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.

The substitute includes a provision not in the introduced that makes the bill's authorization applicable to a groundwater conservation district.

Whereas the introduced clarified that the authorization applies notwithstanding provisions of state open meetings law relating to the use of videoconference calls for water district meetings, the substitute clarifies that the authorization applies notwithstanding those provisions and provisions of that law relating to videoconference calls generally.