BILL ANALYSIS H.B. 2792 By: Shields April 26, 1995 Committee Report (Unamended) BACKGROUND In certain instances, general-law municipalities desire to formally annex small portions of certain home-rule municipalities. The general-law municipalities wish to comply with the request of the citizens presently living within the bounds of a home-rule municipality who would rather live within the bounds of the general-law municipality. Home-rule municipalities currently have the final decision in the potential annexation of their territory by general-law municipalities. PURPOSE HB 2792 provides for the ability of certain general-law municipalities to annex property presently in the possession of certain home-rule municipalities. This addition to the present statute is necessary to provide to citizens important public safety protections such as access to the most conveniently located emergency facilities and to afford citizens some autonomy in determining the authority under which they wish to live. 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 43, Local Government Code, is amended by adding Section 43.0315, authorizing certain, small general-law municipalities in an urban county to annex certain areas in populous home-rule municipalities, as follows: Subsection (a) states that this section applies only to annexation of an area that: (1) is 25 acres or less; (2) is located in a home-rule municipality with a population of 900,000 or more and that is in one county; and (3) is adjacent to a general-law municipality with a population of less than 3,500. Subsection (b) provides that the general-law municipality may annex the area if: (1) the nearest police or fire protection is operated by the general-law municipality; (2) the nearest police or fire protection in the home-rule municipality is more than four miles from the residential dwellings; and (3) a majority of the voters petition the general-law municipality for annexation in writing. Subsection (c) provides that on or before the 30th day after the day the petition is filed with the general-law municipality, the municipality may grant or refuse the petition. Subsection (d) provides that if the petition is granted, annexation may occur. Outstanding liabilities are assumed by the general-law municipality, including the pro rata share of bond obligations. SECTION 2. Emergency clause. Effective upon passage. SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION H.B. 2792 was considered by the committee in a public hearing on April 25, 1995. The following persons testified in favor of the bill: Representative John Shields; Mark Rizzo, representing the residents of Merry Trail, San Antonio, Texas; and Mayor Ralph Hoggatt, representing himself. The bill was reported favorably without amendment, with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed and be sent to the Committee on Local and Consent Calendars, by a record vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays, 0 pnv, 4 absent.