Texas Senate Bill SB1611

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of Senate Committee: 5/9/11
• Introduced: 3/11/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/11/11
• Refer: 3/23/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/18/11
• Report Pass: 5/9/11
• Engrossed: 5/11/11
• Refer: 5/11/11
• Report Pass: 5/18/11

Caption

Relating to the funding of projects in the boundaries of certain intermunicipal commuter rail districts.

Impact

The implementation of SB1611 is expected to enhance investment in transportation infrastructure, specifically targeting the improvement of commuter rail services. By allowing local governments to enter agreements with districts for financing, the bill aims to streamline funding processes and increase the viability of commuter rail systems. This could lead to improved public transport, reduce traffic congestion, and potentially lower emissions as more people adopt rail travel instead of driving. However, it also raises questions regarding the allocation of resources and the financial responsibility of local governments in maintaining these infrastructures.

Summary

SB1611 relates to the funding of projects within certain intermunicipal commuter rail districts in Texas. The bill amends the Transportation Code to define 'commuter rail service' and outlines the conditions under which local governments can collaborate with these districts for infrastructure development. Notably, it introduces provisions for establishing transportation infrastructure zones which can facilitate the financing of such projects through increased ad valorem tax collections. This setup empowers districts, particularly those established prior to January 1, 2005, to create financing and funding models directly related to their newly defined initiatives.

Contention

Opposition to this bill centers around concerns regarding tax increment financing and its implications for local government budgets. Critics fear that reliance on increased property tax collections to fund rail developments may pose risks if projected increases do not materialize, resulting in financial strain. In contrast, supporters argue that such financing mechanisms are crucial for enabling significant infrastructure investments that would otherwise be unattainable. The discussions surrounding SB1611 reflect broader debates about local versus state control in infrastructure funding and the responsibilities of various levels of government.