Texas House Bill HB1920

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 2/28/11
• Refer: 3/7/11

Caption

Relating to transportation planning and funding allocations.

Impact

The anticipated impact of HB1920 includes a more organized approach to transportation funding and project management. The bill introduces performance measures that will assess the effectiveness and efficiency of transportation projects, potentially leading to better resource allocation and prioritization of projects based on regional needs. Additionally, by providing legislative oversight, the bill seeks to promote enhanced scrutiny of transportation funding decisions, which could lead to improved adherence to budgetary and operational standards across planning organizations.

Summary

House Bill 1920 addresses transportation planning and funding allocations in the state of Texas. It amends existing laws to improve the structure and efficiency of the Texas Transportation Commission and introduces provisions for legislative oversight of transportation programs. The bill emphasizes the importance of aligning regional planning commissions with state-level transportation initiatives while ensuring that the composition of planning organizations reflects diverse geographic regions and population groups. It aims to enhance transparency and accountability within transportation projects by mandating the development of performance measures and an interactive web-based tracking system.

Sentiment

General sentiment around HB1920 appears supportive, especially among stakeholders interested in improved efficiency within the Texas transportation system. Advocates argue that the measures introduced will lead to better planning and execution of infrastructure projects supportive of economic growth. Nevertheless, there may be concerns regarding the implementation of performance measures, particularly from smaller planning organizations that may face challenges in adapting to new standards.

Contention

Notable points of contention include potential pushback from local governments regarding the $10 million cap on allocated funds for operational costs of planning organizations, which some may argue could restrict local flexibility. Additionally, the issue of how performance measures are developed and the criteria used could lead to debates about equitability in funding distribution and the prioritization of specific projects over others.