Texas House Bill HB3847

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 4/11/11
• Out of House Committee: 4/26/11
• Refer: 4/13/11
• Voted on by House: 5/4/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/11/11
• Refer: 4/14/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/17/11
• Report Pass: 4/20/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Engrossed: 5/4/11
• Refer: 5/5/11
• Report Pass: 5/11/11
• Enrolled: 5/18/11
• Passed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to the Riverbend Water Resources District.

Impact

The implementation of HB3847 is set to centralize and streamline the management of water resources in the northeast Texas area, enhancing the district's ability to function efficiently and respond to water management challenges. It redefines the roles and responsibilities of board directors by establishing term limits and procedures for their appointment and recall, ensuring that governance remains responsive and accountable to member communities. Notably, the bill seeks to empower local governance while providing a structured framework for the temporary oversight of the district's operations, aiming to bolster community confidence in local water resource management.

Summary

House Bill 3847 focuses on the governance and operational structure of the Riverbend Water Resources District in Texas. The bill proposes amendments to the Special District Local Laws Code, particularly adding provisions for the appointment of a temporary administrator who will oversee the district during a transition period. This administrator will have specific powers and duties that include managing assets, recruiting personnel, and ensuring compliance with relevant laws. Importantly, the bill provides immunity from suit for board members and the temporary administrator in actions related to the changes introduced by this legislation. This legal protection is intended to facilitate smoother operations under the new governance model.

Contention

During discussions surrounding HB3847, there were concerns about the balance of power between the newly appointed temporary administrator and the elected board members. Critics raised questions about the potential for overreach by the temporary administrator, particularly regarding their powers to manage the district's assets and operational decisions without sufficient oversight from elected officials. Additionally, the provisions granting immunity to members and administrators prompted debates on accountability and transparency in governance, with opponents arguing that such measures could hinder checks and balances within the district's framework.