SB 1987

85(R) - 2017
Senate Intergovernmental Relations
Senate Intergovernmental Relations
Local Government
Special Districts
Special Purpose

Vote Recommendation

  • Neutral
  • Positive
  • Neutral
  • Positive
  • Neutral


Eddie Lucio Jr.

Bill Caption

Relating to the notice requirements for bills proposing the creation of or annexation of land to certain special purpose districts.

Fiscal Notes

No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

Bill Analysis

Under current law, a notice must be provided anytime a municipal management district is sought to be established.

This bill would effectively do two things. It requires that notice must also be given anytime the district territory is being expanded (including if a bill in the legislature is filed to create or expand the district). A notice to property owners about the filing of the legislation must include the appropriate bill number. Secondly, it would remove the qualifying criteria that a petition calling for the creation of the district be signed by at least 50 landowners in an area that has 50 or more landowners, making it so that the only way a petition can be accepted is if it is signed by a majority of the landowners within the area to be included in the district. For some districts this would effectively mean fewer landowners would have to sign the petition. For example, a proposed district affecting 60 landowners would only require a majority of 31 landowners to sign the petition rather than the 50 needed under current law. But in larger districts the threshold would be higher.

Vote Recommendation Notes

This bill would bring greater transparency to municipal management districts. Not only by requiring notice and petition requirements when the district is created but also anytime the district boundaries are to be extended. In larger districts where a majority is greater than 50 petitioners, it would also raise the threshold for petition approval to create a district. This promotes the private property rights of all individuals who would be subject to the district's authority and enhances our limited government principle by keeping government from expanding without the affirmative consent of the governed. For these reasons, we support SB 1987.