Texas Senate Bill SB824

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 2/21/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 4/6/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/19/11
• Refer: 3/1/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/20/11
• Refer: 3/15/11
• Report Pass: 4/6/11
• Engrossed: 5/19/11
• Refer: 5/19/11
• Report Pass: 5/20/11

Caption

Relating to the coordination of rural and small community initiatives.

Note

Overall, SB824 represents a proactive attempt to enhance the support for Texas's rural and smaller communities by fostering better communication and collaboration across government entities, which could lead to more responsive and effective community assistance programs.

Impact

The legislation is expected to have a substantial impact on state laws relating to rural community support. By creating a systematic approach to addressing rural issues, such as infrastructure and economic development, the bill aims to enhance the effectiveness of governmental responses. It encourages state and local governments to work collaboratively, which could lead to improved community services and programs that directly align with the local needs of smaller populations. The passage of SB824 would formalize the role of state officials in assisting these communities, thereby potentially leading to better resource allocation and policy development.

Summary

SB824 aims to enhance the coordination of initiatives aimed at supporting rural and small communities in Texas. The bill establishes a framework for interagency cooperation led by a designated rural and small community coordinator, tasked with examining state and federal programs to serve the needs of these communities better. This coordinator's role includes acting as an ombudsman, improving communication between various levels of government, and developing strategies tailored specifically to the unique challenges faced by rural areas.

Contention

While the bill provides a structured approach to addressing the needs of rural communities, some may contend that it does not go far enough in providing direct support or funding for specific initiatives. Critics might argue that without sufficient resources, the coordinator's efforts could be limited, and the intended benefits may not materialize. Furthermore, there might be concerns regarding the effectiveness of interagency coordination, as varying priorities and agendas among state departments could hinder progress.