LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 81ST LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION April 2, 2009 TO: Honorable Lois W. Kolkhorst, Chair, House Committee on Public Health FROM: John S. O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB3004 by Coleman (Relating to animal shelter standards; providing a civil penalty.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated. The bill would amend the Health and Safety Code to authorize a county to enforce standards established for operating an animal shelter, unless the animal shelter is operated by a municipality. The bill would establish a civil penalty of not less than $100 nor more than $500 for each violation and for each day of a continuing violation of the standards for operating an animal shelter. In addition, a county or a municipality in which the violation occurs could institute a civil suit in district court to seek injunctive relief to restrain a person from continuing to commit a violation, to assess and recover the civil penalty, or both actions. If a county or a municipality prevails in court, they would be entitled to recover reasonable costs of investigating the violation, as well as reasonable attorney's fee and court costs. The proposed change in law would apply only to conduct that occurs on or after the effective date of the bill. The bill would take effect immediately if it were to receive the required two-thirds vote in each house; otherwise, it would take effect September 1, 2009. Revenue gain from imposing a civil penalty would depend on the number of violations, the number of days the violation continues, and the judge's discretion in imposing the penalty. According the DSHS, costs associated with implementing provisions of the bill could be absorbed within existing resources. Local Government Impact As indicated above, revenue gain would depend on the number of violations, the number of days the violation continues, and the judge's discretion in imposing a penalty. It is assumed that a local government could absorb any associated enforcement costs within existing resources. No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated. Source Agencies:537 State Health Services, Department of LBB Staff: JOB, CL, DB
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 81ST LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
April 2, 2009
TO: Honorable Lois W. Kolkhorst, Chair, House Committee on Public Health FROM: John S. O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:HB3004 by Coleman (Relating to animal shelter standards; providing a civil penalty.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
TO: Honorable Lois W. Kolkhorst, Chair, House Committee on Public Health
FROM: John S. O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: HB3004 by Coleman (Relating to animal shelter standards; providing a civil penalty.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
Honorable Lois W. Kolkhorst, Chair, House Committee on Public Health
Honorable Lois W. Kolkhorst, Chair, House Committee on Public Health
John S. O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
John S. O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
HB3004 by Coleman (Relating to animal shelter standards; providing a civil penalty.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
HB3004 by Coleman (Relating to animal shelter standards; providing a civil penalty.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
The bill would amend the Health and Safety Code to authorize a county to enforce standards established for operating an animal shelter, unless the animal shelter is operated by a municipality. The bill would establish a civil penalty of not less than $100 nor more than $500 for each violation and for each day of a continuing violation of the standards for operating an animal shelter. In addition, a county or a municipality in which the violation occurs could institute a civil suit in district court to seek injunctive relief to restrain a person from continuing to commit a violation, to assess and recover the civil penalty, or both actions. If a county or a municipality prevails in court, they would be entitled to recover reasonable costs of investigating the violation, as well as reasonable attorney's fee and court costs. The proposed change in law would apply only to conduct that occurs on or after the effective date of the bill. The bill would take effect immediately if it were to receive the required two-thirds vote in each house; otherwise, it would take effect September 1, 2009. Revenue gain from imposing a civil penalty would depend on the number of violations, the number of days the violation continues, and the judge's discretion in imposing the penalty. According the DSHS, costs associated with implementing provisions of the bill could be absorbed within existing resources.
The bill would amend the Health and Safety Code to authorize a county to enforce standards established for operating an animal shelter, unless the animal shelter is operated by a municipality. The bill would establish a civil penalty of not less than $100 nor more than $500 for each violation and for each day of a continuing violation of the standards for operating an animal shelter.
In addition, a county or a municipality in which the violation occurs could institute a civil suit in district court to seek injunctive relief to restrain a person from continuing to commit a violation, to assess and recover the civil penalty, or both actions. If a county or a municipality prevails in court, they would be entitled to recover reasonable costs of investigating the violation, as well as reasonable attorney's fee and court costs.
The proposed change in law would apply only to conduct that occurs on or after the effective date of the bill. The bill would take effect immediately if it were to receive the required two-thirds vote in each house; otherwise, it would take effect September 1, 2009.
Revenue gain from imposing a civil penalty would depend on the number of violations, the number of days the violation continues, and the judge's discretion in imposing the penalty. According the DSHS, costs associated with implementing provisions of the bill could be absorbed within existing resources.
Local Government Impact
As indicated above, revenue gain would depend on the number of violations, the number of days the violation continues, and the judge's discretion in imposing a penalty. It is assumed that a local government could absorb any associated enforcement costs within existing resources. No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.
As indicated above, revenue gain would depend on the number of violations, the number of days the violation continues, and the judge's discretion in imposing a penalty. It is assumed that a local government could absorb any associated enforcement costs within existing resources.
No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.
Source Agencies: 537 State Health Services, Department of
537 State Health Services, Department of
LBB Staff: JOB, CL, DB
JOB, CL, DB