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.