LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE, 82ND LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION April 18, 2011 TO: Honorable John Carona, Chair, Senate Committee on Business & Commerce FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:SB1375 by Estes (Relating to who may participate in certain local option elections to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages.), As Introduced No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated. The bill would add Section 501.1035 to the Election Code to allow a municipality that includes an annexed area to hold a local option election to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages only if a petition that is filed contains a sufficient number of signatures based on the number of qualified voters in the municipality, including the annexed area. The bill also would require that qualified voters of the annexed area be permitted to vote. Local Government Impact There could be costs to a municipality to hold a local option election to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages if a sufficient number of qualified voters filed a petition; however, those costs would vary by locality and are not anticipated to be significant. Based on costs reported to the Secretary of State (SOS) in 2010 by a sampling of counties, municipalities, and special districts, the average cost incurred by a local governmental entity for an election is $1.98 per registered voter. Source Agencies: LBB Staff: JOB, AG, TP
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 82ND LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION
April 18, 2011
TO: Honorable John Carona, Chair, Senate Committee on Business & Commerce FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board IN RE:SB1375 by Estes (Relating to who may participate in certain local option elections to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages.), As Introduced
TO: Honorable John Carona, Chair, Senate Committee on Business & Commerce
FROM: John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: SB1375 by Estes (Relating to who may participate in certain local option elections to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages.), As Introduced
Honorable John Carona, Chair, Senate Committee on Business & Commerce
Honorable John Carona, Chair, Senate Committee on Business & Commerce
John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
John S O'Brien, Director, Legislative Budget Board
SB1375 by Estes (Relating to who may participate in certain local option elections to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages.), As Introduced
SB1375 by Estes (Relating to who may participate in certain local option elections to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages.), As Introduced
No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
The bill would add Section 501.1035 to the Election Code to allow a municipality that includes an annexed area to hold a local option election to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages only if a petition that is filed contains a sufficient number of signatures based on the number of qualified voters in the municipality, including the annexed area. The bill also would require that qualified voters of the annexed area be permitted to vote.
Local Government Impact
There could be costs to a municipality to hold a local option election to prohibit or authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages if a sufficient number of qualified voters filed a petition; however, those costs would vary by locality and are not anticipated to be significant. Based on costs reported to the Secretary of State (SOS) in 2010 by a sampling of counties, municipalities, and special districts, the average cost incurred by a local governmental entity for an election is $1.98 per registered voter.
Source Agencies:
LBB Staff: JOB, AG, TP
JOB, AG, TP