BILL ANALYSIS C.S.H.B. 2143 By: De La Garza 05-05-95 Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND Currently, rural counties cannot take full advantage of taxing for emergency services district when there is a rural fire prevention district in the same area without dissolving the rural fire prevention district. A county cannot coordinate an election to create an emergency services district with an election to dissolve a rural fire prevention district because an election to create an emergency services district is called by the county commissioners court; An election to dissolve a rural fire prevention district must be called by the fire prevention district's board. PURPOSE To permit a county to call one election for the purpose of simultaneously dissolving a rural fire prevention district and creating an emergency services district. 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. SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS SECTION 1: Subchapter B, Chapter 775, Health and Safety Code, is amended by adding Sections 775.023 and 775.024 to read as follows: Sec. 775.023 (a) says this section and section 775.024 only apply to a county located (1) on an international border, (2) has a population more than 375,000; and (3) contains at least seven municipalities, each with a population of more than 12,000. A petition calling for an emergency services district and for the dissolution of those rural fire prevention districts may be filed with the county judge of each county and the petition must be signed by at least 100 voters who own property in the county and the proposed emergency services district. The name of the district proposed by the petition must be " Emergency Services District." (b) says the petition must show: (1) that the district is to be created and is to operate under Section 48-e, Article III, Texas Constitution, as proposed by S.J.R. No. 27, Acts of the 70th Legislature, Regular Session, 1987, and adopted by the voters at an election held Nov. 3, 1987. (2) the name of the proposed emergency services district; (3) the emergency services district's boundaries; (4) the name of each rural fire prevention district that exists and that is proposed to be dissolved; (5) that none of the territory in the emergency services district is included in another emergency services district; and (6) the mailing address of each petitioner. (c) says the petition must contain an agreement signed by at least 2 petitioners that obligates them to pay not more than $150 of the costs of forming the emergency districts. (d) says the county judge may receive the petition and shall file the petition with the county clerk. (e) says the commissioners court shall set hearings to consider the petition and that one hearing must be conducted in each rural fire district that is proposed to be dissolved. The commissioners court may grant the petition after the conclusion of the hearings pursuant to Section 775.017. Sec. 775.024. (a) the commissioners court shall order an election to confirm the creation of the emergency district, to authorize a tax and to assume the assets and liabilities of each fire district proposed to be dissolved. The commissioners court shall order an election in each rural fire district on whether to dissolve the fire districts effective on the date that the emergency services district is created. Applicable election sections are enumerated. (b) says the ballot in the election for to confirm creation of the districts must be printed to permit voting for or against the proposition and sets out the text. (c) says an emergency service district is created if a majority of those voting vote to confirm the creation of the emergency districts. If a majority vote against, a rural fire prevention district as to which the commissioners court orders an election under Sub. (a) is not dissolved, without regard to the results of the dissolution election. (d) says if a majority of those voting at the election vote to dissolve a rural fire prevention district, the territory of the rural fire prevention district is included in the emergency services district. If a majority of those voting at the election vote against dissolving a rural fire prevention district, the territory of the rural fire prevention district may not be included in the emergency services district. (e) says on the effective date of creation of an emergency services district as provided by an order, the board of fire commissioners of a dissolved district shall transfer the assets and liabilities of the rural fire prevention district to the emergency services district. If the rural fire prevention district has outstanding bonds to which ad valorem taxes are pledged, the board of emergency services commissioners of the services district shall fully pay the debt or shall annually impose an ad valorem tax on all property located in the district and subject to district taxation at a rate sufficient to pay the principal and interest on the bonds. Dissolution of the rural fire prevention district does not diminish the rights of the bond or note holders at the time of dissolution. SECTION 2: EMERGENCY CLAUSE AND EFFECTIVE DATE. COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE The committee substitute is bracketed so that the bill only affects a county that is located on an international border that has a population of more than 375,000 and contains at least seven municipalities each with a population of more than 12,000. SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION HB 2143 was considered by the County Affairs Committee in a public hearing on 4/26/95. Representative De La Garza opened. The following person testified for HB 2143: David Mendez, representing Hildago County. The committee considered a complete committee substitute. Representative De La Garza closed. HB 2143 was left pending. HB 2143 was considered by the County Affairs committee in a formal hearing on 5/2/95. The committee considered a complete committee substitute to HB 2143. The substitute was adopted without objection. HB 2143 was reported favorably, as substituted, with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed, by the record vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 0 pnv, 0 absent. The vote by which HB 2143, as substituted, was reported favorably with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed was reconsidered without objection in a public meeting of the County Affairs Committee on 5/3/95. HB 2143, as substituted, was reported favorably with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed and be sent to the Committee on Local and Consent Calendars, by the record vote of 6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 pnv, 3 absent.