Texas House Bill HB1651

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 2/22/11
• Out of House Committee: 4/18/11
• Voted on by House: 4/27/11
• Refer: 3/3/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/19/11
• Report Pass: 4/13/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/25/11
• Engrossed: 4/27/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Refer: 4/29/11
• Report Pass: 5/19/11
• Enrolled: 5/27/11
• Passed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to the North Oak Cliff Municipal Management District.

Impact

The impact of HB1651 on state laws is significant in that it provides municipal management districts with broader powers to raise funds and manage financial resources specifically for defined projects or improvements. This change is aimed at improving the infrastructure and services within the district by allowing tailored tax impositions and bond issues that target specific needs of designated areas. As a result, it enables local governments to be more agile and responsive to immediate community improvements without necessarily drawing on broader district resources. The approval process requires a majority vote from residents in the defined areas, ensuring local input in the governance process.

Summary

House Bill 1651 relates specifically to the North Oak Cliff Municipal Management District in Texas. The bill amends existing provisions in the Special District Local Laws Code to enhance the district's financial mechanisms, specifically regarding the issuance of bonds and the imposition of ad valorem taxes. This new legislation establishes the authority for the district to define specific areas or designate particular properties within its jurisdiction for the purpose of funding improvements and services that primarily benefit those defined areas. By clearly articulating the processes for such designations and financial strategies, the bill aims to provide clarity and operational efficiency for the district's management plans.

Contention

Despite the potential benefits, there could be contention surrounding the application of the powers granted by HB1651. Skyrocketing property taxes, particularly in rapidly developing areas, might result in resistance from residents wary of increased financial responsibilities. Additionally, opposition could stem from concerns about the equitable distribution of services and improvements across different neighborhoods within the district. Critics may argue that the establishment of defined areas could lead to disparities where some communities receive enhanced services while others are overlooked, fostering inequality and dissatisfaction among residents.