Texas House Bill HB3436

Texas 2023 - 88th Regular

• Filed: 3/3/23
• Out of House Committee: 5/2/23
• Voted on by House: 5/9/23
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/19/23
• Voted on by Senate: 5/23/23
• Governor Action: 6/18/23

Caption

Relating to the authority of the Texas Military Department to negotiate the release of a reversionary interest and certain other interests of the state in certain property in Palo Pinto County owned by the Palo Pinto County Livestock Association.

Impact

If enacted, this bill would amend the original deed restrictions, granting the Texas Military Department the ability to assess the property and determine its fair market value. The change would potentially lead to the release of the state's reversionary interest, facilitating the Livestock Association's plans for development. This shift also has broader implications regarding state control over property interests and local governance, as it reflects the state’s readiness to negotiate terms that align with local community development needs.

Summary

House Bill 3436 aims to provide the Texas Military Department with the authority to negotiate the release of a reversionary interest held by the state over certain property in Palo Pinto County, Texas. This property is owned by the Palo Pinto County Livestock Association, which has historically been restricted from utilizing the land for purposes other than fairground activities due to the reversionary clause imposed when the state transferred the property in 1953. The bill seeks to lift these restrictions, thereby allowing the Livestock Association to make improvements to the property, including building an arena.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 3436 appears largely positive among legislators, with the bill passing through both the House and Senate with relatively high margins—130 yeas to 12 nays in the House and 31 yeas to 0 nays in the Senate. Supporters argue that the bill promotes local economic growth and enables the Livestock Association to better serve its community by modernizing its facilities. However, there are concerns regarding the long-term implications of such negotiations on local governance and accountability.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the potential redefining of state versus local authority. Critics worry about the precedent set by allowing the state to withdraw restrictions on property that it previously regulated, which may lead to oversights or loss of local input in such matters. Additionally, there were discussions among lawmakers regarding the adequacy of the fair market value assessments and if the local association is adequately compensated, ensuring transparency in the negotiation process.