BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 3082 |
By: Capriglione |
Investments & Financial Services |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties contend that the continuing education requirement for certain local government employees relating to investment responsibilities should be reduced because the relative consistency in the content of the applicable law makes the continuing education less necessary. C.S.H.B. 3082 seeks to provide for this reduction.
|
||||||||||
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. 3082 amends the Government Code to decrease from 10 hours to five hours the minimum number of hours of instruction relating to investment responsibilities a local government's chief financial officer if the county treasurer is not the chief financial officer and investment officer, other than a county treasurer, are required to receive at least once in a two‑year period from attending an investment training session.
C.S.H.B. 3082 repeals Section 2256.008(a-1), Government Code, relating to the requirement that the treasurer, or the chief financial officer if the treasurer is not the chief financial officer, and the investment officer of a school district or a municipality attend an investment training session at least once in a two-year period and receive a minimum of eight hours of instruction relating to investment responsibilities.
|
||||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2017.
|
||||||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 3082 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.
|
||||||||||
|