Texas House Bill HB3327

Texas 2019 - 86th Regular

Caption

Relating to the acquisition of real property for a proposed oil and gas pipeline through eminent domain by a common carrier.

Summary

House Bill 3327 addresses the acquisition of real property for proposed oil and gas pipelines specifically through the use of eminent domain by common carriers. It establishes new procedural rules designed to enhance transparency and communication with affected property owners and local governments. Key provisions include requirements for common carriers to send written notices of intent to acquire property, detailing the project and the intended use of the land. This aims to inform local stakeholders as early as possible in the pipeline development process, ensuring they are aware of potential impacts on their properties. The bill mandates that common carriers must not initiate contact with property owners until after a set period post-notification, allowing for appropriate time to consider the implications of such developments. Following this notice period, if applicable, a public meeting must be scheduled in coordination with the local county to discuss the proposed pipeline route. This public forum serves to facilitate community input, and common carriers are required to attend these meetings to gather feedback and address concerns raised by residents. One significant impact of HB3327 is the potential to alter the relationship between oil and gas companies and landowners, providing greater opportunities for dialogue and engagement. The expectation is that with these added procedural steps, the concerns of landowners and local residents can be heard and considered before decisions are made about land acquisition for pipeline construction. This could lead to more amicable arrangements and best practices in the relationship between common carriers and local communities. However, notable points of contention surrounding the bill include concerns from some landowners regarding the grounds on which eminent domain can be invoked. While supporters argue that the bill strikes a fair balance between industry needs and public involvement, opponents worry it may still lead to coercive practices where land is acquired against the wishes of the owners. Advocates for property rights emphasize the need for safeguards that ensure local voices are prioritized and maintain that the procedural additions should provide substantive protections against aggressive acquisition efforts.