Texas House Bill HB3140

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of House Committee: 4/19/11
• Introduced: 3/10/11
• Refer: 3/18/11
• Report Pass: 4/13/11

Caption

Relating to the authority of certain municipalities to create economic development programs and provide loans or grants for those programs; providing authority to issue bonds.

Impact

The implementation of HB 3140 is expected to have significant implications for local economies by providing municipalities with enhanced tools to attract and retain businesses. By facilitating access to loans and grants, the bill encourages local governments to actively engage in economic development initiatives that can increase job opportunities and diversify the economic base. By enabling the issuance of revenue bonds without the requirement of pledging municipal tax revenues, the bill provides municipalities greater flexibility in financing projects that would otherwise be constrained under existing rules.

Summary

House Bill 3140 grants specific municipalities in Texas the authority to establish economic development programs and provide financial assistance through loans or grants. This legislation specifically targets municipalities located in counties with populations of 750,000 or more that are adjacent to counties bordering Oklahoma. The bill allows these municipalities to create and administer programs aimed at promoting new or expanding business activities, including manufacturing, retail, and multifamily residential projects. This initiative is seen as a tool to stimulate local economies and address issues like unemployment.

Contention

While supporters of the bill argue that it empowers municipalities to address local economic issues effectively, opponents express concerns regarding the potential for mismanagement of funds and prioritizing certain types of development over others. Additionally, there are worries about the lack of checks and balances connected to the issuance of bonds, as the bill exempts municipalities from some existing requirements related to competitive bids and public input. As such, critics fear this could lead to a lack of transparency in how funds are allocated and the projects that are ultimately prioritized.