Texas House Bill HB3312

Texas 2009 - 81st Regular

• Out of House Committee: 5/4/09

Caption

Relating to the creation of a district court records technology fund.

Impact

The bill proposes specific amendments to the Government Code that authorize counties to implement this fee as part of their annual budget. It enables local governments to generate funding for critical archival work, which is essential for maintaining the integrity and accessibility of court documents. The fees collected are designated solely for the purposes outlined in the bill, meaning they cannot be diverted for unrelated expenses or administrative costs. This focus on restricted use underscores the intent to enhance the management of court records and support transparency in county governance.

Summary

House Bill 3312 pertains to the establishment of a District Court Records Technology Fund, intended to secure financial resources for the preservation and restoration of district court records across Texas. The legislation outlines a mechanism allowing county commissioners courts to adopt an archive fee, not exceeding $5, which can be charged during the filing of various legal documents, including suits and appeals. The funds collected would be directed specifically towards preservation and restoration efforts, ensuring that court documents remain accessible and in good condition despite deterioration due to time or natural disasters.

Conclusion

In conclusion, HB 3312 aims to facilitate the creation of a specific fund dedicated to managing district court records through a modest fee system. By empowering local governments to handle the preservation of crucial court documents, it addresses vital needs within the state's judiciary. However, potential pushback concerning fee implications and fund management may drive further legislative discourse as this bill progresses.

Contention

Debates around HB 3312 could arise regarding the feasibility and implications of imposing additional fees for court filing. Opponents may argue that imposing such a fee might deter individuals from pursuing legal actions due to added financial burdens, particularly for low-income residents. Moreover, there can be concerns about how funds are managed and whether these financial resources will effectively translate into meaningful preservation efforts. Furthermore, policy discussions may emerge over how county commissioners courts can balance the need for these fees with equitable access to the judicial system.