BILL ANALYSIS

 

 

 

C.S.H.B. 1862

By: Oliverson

Intergovernmental Affairs

Committee Report (Substituted)

 

 

 

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

 

The bill author has informed the committee that in some large Texas counties, disputes over law enforcement funding and authority have created challenges for sheriffs and constables and that law enforcement agencies have expressed concerns over their financial stability and independence. The bill author has also informed the committee that Harris County is currently imposing restrictions on its constables that make it difficult for them to manage their budgets efficiently. The bill author has further informed the committee that in some cases unspent funds at the end of a fiscal year are removed from law enforcement budgets rather than being rolled over for future use. The bill author has informed the committee that, additionally, disparities in pay exist between equivalent positions in different law enforcement agencies, effectively creating unfair treatment between officers performing the same duties, and that some local governments attempt to dictate the rates at which constables and other agencies can enter into contracts for law enforcement services. The bill author has informed the committee that these issues have made it harder to recruit, train, and retain officers, which ultimately affects public safety. C.S.H.B. 1862 seeks to ensure that law enforcement agencies in large counties have greater financial stability and operational independence, and to improve public safety and ensure that these agencies have the resources needed to serve their communities effectively, by setting out provisions relating to the funding of, contracting with, and employment for law enforcement agencies in certain counties.

 

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. 1862 amends the Local Government Code to authorize the sheriff and a constable, respectively, of a county with a population of more than 3.3 million to enter into a contract with a local government, a property owners' association, or an owner of land to provide law enforcement services in the county or the constable's precinct, as applicable, in and near the area managed or regulated by the local government or the association or the area owned by the owner and to the persons residing in or visiting such areas. The bill prohibits the commissioners court of the sheriff's or constable's county from prohibiting or otherwise restricting the sheriff or constable from entering into such a contract. The bill authorizes the sheriff and constable, respectively, to enter into the contract and determine the contract's terms, regardless of whether the commissioners court approves of the contract or the terms. The bill defines the following:

·         "local government" as a county, municipality, municipal utility district, school district, junior college district, or other political subdivision of the state; and

·         "property owners' association" by reference to provisions relating to the construction and enforcement of restrictive covenants.

 

C.S.H.B. 1862 does the following with respect to a county with a population of more than 3.3 million:

·         expands the conditions under which the county is required to hold an election for the reduction of funding or resources for certain primary law enforcement agencies to include a change by the county of an adopted budget that results in a budget for a fiscal year that makes an applicable reduction in funding or resources; and

·         includes as applicable reductions for purposes of such an election the reallocation of unspent funding that was appropriated to a law enforcement agency and the reallocation of funding previously appropriated for a specific law enforcement position to another agency.

 

C.S.H.B. 1862 prohibits a county with a population of more than 3.3 million from doing the following:

·         transferring money appropriated to the office of sheriff or constable to the county's general revenue fund or any other county account; or

·         prohibiting the office of sheriff or constable from spending money appropriated to the office for any lawful purpose.

The bill prohibits such a county from prohibiting or otherwise restricting the use of appropriated money by the sheriff or constable, as applicable, for a lawful purpose, if the county auditor or county treasurer determines that the money is available to the office of the sheriff or constable, as applicable. The bill, in relation to money received under a contract entered into under the bill's provisions, does the following:

·         requires the commissioners court of the sheriff's or constable's county to credit the money to the office of the sheriff or constable, as applicable;

·         prohibits the commissioners court from crediting the money to the county's general revenue fund; and

·         prohibits the commissioners court from reducing the appropriation to the office of the sheriff or constable, as applicable, by the amount of the money received because the money is considered, for purposes of a required election for the reduction of funding or resources for certain primary law enforcement agencies, as part of the office's appropriation for the county fiscal year in which the money is received.

 

C.S.H.B. 1862 requires a county with a population of more than 3.3 million to provide employees of the following law enforcement agencies in the county in equivalent positions with substantially similar compensation:

·         the sheriff's office;

·         each constable's office; and

·         any other law enforcement agency with a primary responsibility to police and investigate criminal offenses and that is primarily funded by the county.

 

EFFECTIVE DATE

 

September 1, 2025.

 

COMPARISON OF INTRODUCED AND SUBSTITUTE

 

While C.S.H.B. 1862 may differ from the introduced in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following summarizes the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.

 

Whereas the introduced applied to a county with a population of more than 1.2 million, the substitute applies to a county with a population of more than 3.3 million.