BILL ANALYSIS
H.B. 3082
By: Holzheauser
May 4, 1995
Committee Report (Unamended)
BACKGROUND
Under current law, a drainage district may only be formed after a
petition is presented to and approved by the commissioners court of
the county by 25 resident freehold taxpayers of the proposed
district (or 1/3 if there are less than 75). At the hearing,
before proceeding any further, the court must find that the
drainage of the proposed district is feasible and practicable and
is needed and would be conducive to public health or would be a
public benefit or a public utility.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to allow landowners with property in an
area not included in a drainage district to create a district or be
annexed by another district. It will also allow landowners in
different districts to consolidate existing drainage districts.
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 Amends Subchapter B, Chapter 56, Water Code, by adding
Section 56.033 that provides for the creation of a
drainage district through an election called by the
county commissioners court upon the validation of a
petition from landowners residing in an area not
included in a district. It sets the requirements of the
petition and requires the commissioners court to hold
a hearing to determine the validity of the petition
prior to ordering the election.
SECTION 2 Amends Chapter 56, Water Code, by adding Subchapters J
and K.
Subchapter J provides for the annexation of an area not
included in a district if the residents of the area
petition the board of the existing district. It sets
out the requirements of the petition and requires the
board to hold a hearing on the validity of the petition.
The court must publish notice of the hearing in a manner
provided by this section. To be approved, the measure
must receive the support of a majority of voters in both
the existing district and the area to be annexed. It
provides for the procedure and notice of the election,
and states that the added area must assume its pro rata
share of all indebtedness or taxes authorized by the
district to which it is added.
Subchapter K provides for the consolidation of districts
by a petition requesting an election on the question
presented to the commissioners court. It sets out the
requirements of the petition and requires the
commissioners court to order an election on the question
if the petition is determined to be valid. It also
requires the court to give notice of the election and
dictates the language to be used on the ballot. The
section also provides for the canvassing of the results
of the election by the commissioners court and provides
for the title to property and assumption of debt of the
consolidated districts.
SECTION 3 Emergency clause.
SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION
H.B. 3082 was considered by the committee in a public hearing on
April 18, 1995.
The following person testified in favor of the bill:
Representative Steve Holzheauser.
The following person testified against the bill:
Pam Thompson, representing herself and Citizens
Organized to Defend Austin.
The bill was reported favorably without amendment, with the
recommendation that it do pass and be printed, by a record vote of
9 ayes, 0 nays, 0 pnv, 0 absent.
On May 3, 1995, the bill was recommitted to committee.
H.B. 3082 was considered by the committee in a formal meeting on
May 3, 1995.
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 6
ayes, 0 nays, 0 pnv, 3 absent.