LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE
74th Regular Session
April 12, 1995
TO: Honorable Ken Armbrister, Chair IN RE: Committee Substitute
Committee on State Affairs for
Senate Senate Bill
Austin, Texas No. 14
FROM: John Keel, Director
In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on Senate Bill No.
14 (Relating to protecting private real property rights from
certain actions of this state or a political subdivision of this
state.) this office has determined the following:
The bill creates a new cause of action: a statutory taking that
goes beyond current law regarding the unconstitutional taking of
private property rights. It also waives sovereign immunity as
provided in the bill and permits the State and other governmental
entities to be sued for compensation for actions taken by the
government entity that are the producing cause of a reduction in
the market value of the affected private real property of 20
percent or more.
The bill would allow the owners of private property who prevails
in a suit to recover loss of market value, reasonable and
necessary attorneys fees, court costs and all prejudgment
interest.
The bill also imposes a duty on the Office of The Attorney
General to prepare guidelines to assist governmental entities in
identifying and evaluating those governmental actions that
constitute a taking. These guidelines must be completed no
later than January 1, 1996, and must be published in the Texas
Register and revised annually.
Like the State, local governments would be required to go through
a formalized procedure for performing "taking" assessments and
would be required to pay monetary compensation for reductions in
the market value of private real property interest.
In addition, the bill would require a Chief Appraiser to consider
the effect of governmental actions on the market value of private
real property when appraising for ad valorem tax purposes.
The fiscal implication to the State or units of local government
cannot be determined due to insufficient information regarding
the number of successful actions, amount of market value loss or
parcels of property which may be affected.
The Texas Department of Transportation has estimated that the
cost specific to the Department would be as follows:
The probable fiscal implication of implementing the provisions of
the bill during each of the first five years following passage
is estimated as follows:
Fiscal Probable Cost Out Change in
Year of State Highway Number of State
Fund 006 Employees from
FY 1995
1996 $13,124,028 28.0
1997 13,124,028 28.0
1998 13,124,028 28.0
1999 13,124,028 28.0
2000 13,124,028 28.0
Similar annual fiscal implications would continue as long as the
provisions of the bill are in effect.
Source: Office of the Attorney General, Natural Resources
Conservation Commission, Department of Transportation, Parks and
Wildlife Department
LBB Staff: JK, BR, DF