BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 256 |
By: Hernandez |
Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties are concerned that cities lack the ability to directly address establishments that are a common nuisance due to their violation of the Alcoholic Beverage Code. C.S.H.B. 256 seeks to address this issue by authorizing a city attorney to sue in the name of the city to abate and enjoin the common nuisance.
|
||||||
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
|
||||||
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.
|
||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 256 amends the Alcoholic Beverage Code to authorize the city attorney in a city where a common nuisance relating to a place where alcoholic beverages are sold, bartered, manufactured, stored, possessed, or consumed exists to sue in the name of the city for an injunction to abate and temporarily and permanently enjoin the nuisance.
|
||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2017.
|
||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 256 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and formatted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||
|