Texas Senate Bill SB1613

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 3/11/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 4/4/11
• Voted on by Senate: 4/7/11
• Refer: 3/23/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/18/11
• Report Pass: 4/4/11
• Voted on by House: 5/23/11
• Engrossed: 4/7/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Refer: 4/29/11
• Report Pass: 5/16/11
• Enrolled: 5/23/11
• Passed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to the application of the public meetings and public information laws to public power utilities.

Impact

The changes proposed in SB1613 may dilute public oversight of public power utilities. While supporters of the bill argue that it will foster a more competitive and dynamic utility market by protecting sensitive commercial information, it raises concerns about transparency and accountability. Opponents fear that such provisions could lead to reduced public insight into utility operations, ultimately affecting consumer rights and regulatory oversight, particularly in urban areas heavily reliant on these services.

Summary

SB1613 addresses the application of public meetings and public information laws specifically in relation to public power utilities. The legislation seeks to amend current laws regarding how public utilities handle competitive matters. By allowing public power utilities' governing bodies to deliberate on these matters in closed sessions without the requirement of open meetings, the bill introduces a degree of confidentiality that may benefit from competitive strategies in an increasingly commercialized sector. This reflects a shift toward increased discretion for public utilities regarding what information can be disclosed publicly.

Conclusion

As SB1613 moves forward, its implications for state laws regarding public utility operations will be closely monitored. The evolution of this bill reflects ongoing tensions between competitive business practices and the public's right to access information about services fundamental to daily life. The legislation presents a critical examination of how state governance interacts with public utilities in the age of privatization and commercialization.

Contention

The most notable contention surrounding SB1613 lies in the balance between fostering a competitive environment for public utilities and maintaining transparency for consumers and stakeholders. Proponents fear that without the ability to make some discussions confidential, public utilities may be at a competitive disadvantage compared to private entities. Conversely, critics argue that allowing closed sessions may result in opacity that undercuts public confidence in public services. The potential for abuse of these closed meeting provisions is a significant point of debate among legislators and advocacy groups focused on consumer rights.