LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 77th Regular Session March 16, 2001 TO: Honorable David Counts, Chair, House Committee on Natural Resources FROM: John Keel, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE: HB1784 by Cook (Relating to the ratification, creation, administration, powers, duties, operation, and financing of groundwater conservation districts for the management of groundwater resources in the central Carrizo-Wilcox area.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted ************************************************************************** * Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for * * HB1784, Committee Report 1st House, Substituted: positive impact * * of $0 through the biennium ending August 31, 2003. * * * * No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated. * ************************************************************************** General Revenue-Related Funds, Five-Year Net Impact: **************************************************** * Fiscal Year Probable Net Positive/(Negative) * * Impact to General Revenue Related * * Funds * * 2002 $0 * * 2003 0 * * 2004 0 * * 2005 0 * * 2006 0 * **************************************************** All Funds, Five-Year Impact: ************************************************************************** *Fiscal Probable Revenue Probable Revenue Probable Revenue * * Year Gain/(Loss) to Gain/(Loss) from Gain/(Loss) from * * Brazos ValleyGCD Post-Oak Savannah GCD Mid-East Texas GCD * * 2002 $514,372 $1,982,096 $385,094 * * 2003 529,803 1,982,096 385,094 * * 2004 545,697 1,982,096 385,094 * * 2005 562,068 1,982,096 385,094 * * 2006 578,930 1,982,096 385,094 * ************************************************************************** Fiscal Analysis The bill would ratify the creation of the Brazos Valley Groundwater Conservation District in Robertson and Brazos counties and would create the Post Oak Savannah Groundwater Conservation District in Milam and Burleson counties and the Mid-East Texas Groundwater Conservation District in Leon, Madison, and Freestone counties. Current law regarding groundwater conservation districts allows districts to issue bonds and to have taxing authority. The districts that would be created by this bill do not have taxing authority and would instead receive funding from permit fees, bonds issued, revenues from the ownership or operation of the district's works, improvements, and facilities, and from the sale, transportation, and distribution of water. The bill would require a confirmation election in each of the following counties: Robertson, Brazos, Milam, Burleson, Leon, Madison and Freestone. Methodology The table above presents the estimated new annual revenue for each district. It does not include the cost to counties of holding the confirmation election that would be required in each of the seven counties affected by the bill. The Brazos Valley Groundwater Conservation District's revenues would increase because the bill would allow the district to increase its fees by 3% each year. The Water Uses Section of the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) provided 1997 figures for reported groundwater usage in each of the proposed districts. The usage amounts were used to estimate fees that each district could expect to generate according to the provisions of this bill. Statistics regarding groundwater transported outside the district and the exemptions regarding water well pumpage capacity for water use entities and rural domestic use were unavailable. Based on the reported ground water usage amounts that TWDB provided, and assuming that districts would charge the maximum fees allowed in the bill, the districts would have the following estimated revenues in their first year of operation: Brazos Valley Groundwater Conservation District would have $514,372, the Post Oak Savannah Groundwater Conservation District would have $2 million (including both Milam and Burleson counties), and the Mid-East Texas Groundwater Conservation District would have $385,094. Local Government Impact Counties could incur a cost associated with a confirmation election, if a separate election would be required. The cost to counties requiring a separate election is estimated at $0.91 per voter, based on a recent sample of county election costs. The cost to a county holding the confirmation election in conjunction with a previously scheduled election is not expected to be significant. Source Agencies: 582 Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, 580 Texas Water Development Board, 455 Railroad Commission of Texas, 304 Comptroller of Public Accounts LBB Staff: JK, CL, TL, DB