HomeMy WebLinkAbout029652 RES - 10/16/2012Resolution
Adopting the City of Corpus Christi's
State Legislative Priorities for 2013.
WHEREAS, the 83rd Regular Session of the Texas Legislature convenes on January 8,
2013.
WHEREAS, Every session, thousands of bills are filed and many have the potential to
either directly or indirectly impact the City, its programs and services, its citizens, the tax
base, and community needs; and
WHEREAS, The City's Intergovernmental Relations (IGR) Department is responsible for
monitoring state and federal governmental activities, developing legislative programs
approved by City Council, managing the City's legislative consultants, and coordinating
legislative activities with other public and private sector entities and municipal advocacy
organizations; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to provide guidance for the City's officers and
representatives in conducting the City's legislative efforts and relations; and
WHEREAS, to be . successful, this ever -evolving business environment requires close
contact and constant communication with legislative leadership, external legislative
consultants, municipal advocacy organizations, statewide municipal partners,
community leadership, and community stakeholders.
Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Corpus Christi,
Texas:
SECTION 1. The City Council adopts the City of Corpus Christi State Legislative
Priorities, which is attached to and incorporated into this resolution.
SECTION 2. The Legislative Priorities remain in effect until amended by the City
Council.
SECTION 3. The City Manager is directed to distribute these Legislative Priorities to
the local legislative delegation, legislative leadership, external legislative consultants,
municipal advocacy organizations, statewide municipal partners, community leadership,
and community stakeholders to solicit their advice and support.
This esolution takes effect upon City Council approval on this the
, 2012.
Resolution 2013 State Legis Priorities 9-27-12
09652
1
lU day of
INDEXED
ATTEST: THE CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI
Armando Chapa
City Secretary
Corpus Christi, Texas
(p*Jof on510
, 2012
doe-Adtame (kk-Lj Mori
Mayor 'WC C J
The above resolution was passed by the following vote:
Joe Adame
Chris N. Adler
Kelley Allen
Larry Elizondo, Sr.
Priscilla G. Leal
David Loeb
John E. Marez
Nelda Martinez
Mark Scott
Resolution 2013 State Legis Priorities 9-27-12
n14
City of Corpus Christi
STATE
LEGISLATIVE
PRIORITIES
03rd Texas Legislature
2013
Tom Tagliabue, Director, Intergovernmental Relations
361.826.3850
tomtag@cctexas.com
Page 1 of 37
Introduction
Prior to the beginning of each state and federal legislative session, the City of Corpus Christi
staff, working with input and support from the City Council, the City's lobby team, interested
stakeholders, the Texas Municipal League (TML), and other cities, develop a list of potential
legislative policy and appropriations recommendations.
The City's success is measured by both passage of beneficial legislation as well as preventing
passage of legislation that could have detrimental effects on the City, its programs and services,
tax base, citizens, business, and industry.
Texas Legislative Preview
As Texas continues to recover from the economic recession of the past several years, revenue
projections for the State of Texas is improving. However, Governor Rick Perry and the
Legislative Budget Board have directed state agencies to develop their legislative appropriations
requests for the 2014-2015 biennial budget, to identify 10 percent savings (in five percent
increments) in general revenue -related funding. The leadership also warned state agencies they
may be asked to reduce their fiscal year 2013 budgets should state fiscal conditions warrant it.
During the interim (mid -2011 through 2012), committees of the Texas Senate and House
conducted policy studies, in which City staff monitored and participated. These committees will
issue reports towards the end of 2012 with recommendations for the 83rd Texas Legislature to
consider.
The outcome of the November 6, 2012, General Election could alter who will play critical roles
in the Texas Legislature for many of the City's priorities. Although there is expected to be
significant turnover in membership (more than 40 members of the House and at least five in the
Senate), the Texas Legislature is anticipated to remain a fiscally conservative body. Because
statewide elected offices are not on the ballot this year, Governor Rick Perry remains in a strong
and influential position on policy and appropriations issues. As in the past, the legislature has a
negative reaction to legislation which has an associated cost to implement -- in legislative terms
"a positive fiscal note". Bills that have no cost (a "zero fiscal note") or provide a cost savings
have a better chance at passage.
During a legislative interim hearing this summer, Mike Reissig of the Comptroller of Public
Accounts said a "slowing economy" for Texas is expected over the next few years due to
European debt crisis, weakness in China and India, sluggish U.S. growth and lower global
demand for oil. He indicated state employment growth is anticipated to slow, personal income
growth is expected to decline, and the gross state product is expected to grow. Tax collections in
2012 are growing modestly - sales taxes, motor vehicle sales and franchise taxes. The
Legislature will face some daunting challenges when it convenes in January 2013. Despite a
projected budget surplus, the Legislative Budget Board expects to need a supplemental
appropriation bill to deal with a Medicaid funding need of $4.7 billion, $180 million for wildfire
recovery, $60 million for correctional health care, possibly $2 billion for public education to deal
with school enrollment growth, and perhaps another $800 million for higher education will be
Page 2 of 37
needed. Even Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives Joe Straus predicted the state will
need an additional $9 billion.
Legislative Program Administration
The execution of the City's legislative program is coordinated and carried out on a day-to-day
basis by the Director of Intergovernmental Relations, under the general supervision of the
Assistant City Manager for Business Support Services and the general direction of the City
Manager upon approval of the program by the City Council. The City also contracts with
professional legislative liaisons at both the state and federal level, who coordinate with and
receive direction from the Director of Intergovernmental Relations. As in the past, the City
anticipates working closely with the local legislative delegation to both sponsor the City's
legislative priorities and assist in defeating measures with a negative or harmful impact on the
City, its residents or tax base. In addition, the City will work continue to work closely with the
Texas Municipal League (TML) and the major metropolitan cities in Texas on issues of
importance and value to municipalities. It is recognized that this policy will often be
implemented in the context of great numbers of voluminous proposals being considered within
short time periods. City representatives, under the direction of the City Manager, shall be
authorized to act on behalf of the City consistent with the necessarily broad policy concerns set
forth in this policy.
LEGISLATIVE TIMELINES
May -June 2012
Solicit ideas for possible legislative proposals
July -August 2012
Research ideas with City staff, Texas Municipal League, lobby team,
stakeholders, state and federal agencies
September 25,
2012
Council workshop on state legislative policy & appropriation issues
October 9, 2012
Council discussion of state legislative policy & appropriation
recommendations on Future Agenda.
October 16, 2012
Council vote on state legislative policy & appropriation recommendations
October -
November-
December 2012
Prepare bill draft, analysis, supporting documentation. Deliver report to
City lobby team & begin discussions with possible authors/sponsors.
November 6, 2013
General Election Day
November 12,
2012
Pre -filing of legislation begins for 83r1 Texas Legislature
January 3, 2013
113th U.S. Congress convenes
January 8, 2013
83'1 Texas Legislature convenes
January 20, 2013
Presidential Inauguration Day
March 8, 2013
Deadline for filing bills and joint resolutions other than local bills,
emergency appropriations, and bills that have been declared an
emergency by the governor
May 27, 2013
83r1 Texas Legislature adjourns Sine Die
June 16, 2013
Last day governor can sign or veto bills passed during the regular
legislative session
Page 3 of 37
The City of Corpus Christi's state and federal legislative priorities will be approved by the city
council several months ahead of the 83`d Regular Session of the Texas Legislature and the 113t
U.S. Congress convening in January 2013. The City's legislative policy recommendations
address specific desired outcomes, but also gives the IGR staff and contract external lobbyists
guidance to respond and react to emerging policy and funding issues that materialize during the
time -constrained crunch of the legislative sessions. In the event the IGR staff requires guidance,
specific resolutions may be brought to the city council in order to give direction or when the
situation requires a higher level of input.
General State Le ' islative Guidelines
0,4
• Protect and enhance City revenues.
• Reduces or eliminates costs to the
City.
• Support local control.
• Protects policies previously
established by City leadership
through the Charter, ordinances,
resolutions, and master plans.
• Provide increased educational
opportunities for the citizens of
Corpus Christi and the Coastal
Bend region by supporting its
public schools, community
colleges, and universities.
• Undermine the principle of home rule and
local control by the City.
• Results in the loss of revenue or negatively
impacts potential revenue growth to the City.
• Diminishes the authority of cities to regulate
and manage their growth and development.
• Nullify or undermine the City's policies
contained in existing provisions of the Charter,
ordinances, resolutions, and master plans,
unless such changes expand the City's ability
to manage its own affairs.
• Imposes unfunded mandates that requires any
expenditures by the City unless all costs are
fully reimbursed by the mandating
governmental entity.
The City's IGR Department places three levels of importance on legislative issues.
✓ Priority - means the City will actively pursue and support/oppose the policy, including,
if necessary, seeking introduction and passage of legislation. This would include purely
local Corpus Christi bills, as well as very important legislation of statewide application.
✓ Actively Support/Oppose — means the City will aggressively attempt to influence
passage/defeat of a measure if it is introduced by some other entity.
✓ Endorse - means the City will make its support or opposition known, but will not
actively pursue the issue.
Page 4 of 37
1
CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI STATE LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES
1
NOTE: Please see Appendix A for more detailed briefing information on Priority topics. No
additional briefing information provided on Actively Support/Oppose and Endorse items.
PRIORITY
1. Windstorm Insurance reform to include de -populating the windstorm insurance pool;
spreading the risk to a larger pool of insured; repealing Class 2 and 3 post -event bonds;
allowing single adjuster for TWIA loss claims; limiting frivolous lawsuits; creating
incentives for insurance companies to write policies in the voluntary market, and setting
reasonable premiums for policyholders.
2. Expand authority of Joint Airport Zoning Board in Chapter 241, Local Government
Code, to prevent and mitigate electromagnetic and radar interference.
3. Seek funding to protect Texas military installations from future budget cuts or BRAC -
like actions by improving operational efficiency, enhancing the strategic military mission,
or eliminating potential incompatible land uses near Texas military bases.
4. Give local governments access to a variety of financing tools, and remove any restrictions
that limit flexibility to use economic incentives to address community -specific
transportation infrastructure needs through all project phases.
5. Strongly protect and proactively oppose any effort to take away the City's existing water
rights. No legislation needed.
6. Exempt the Corpus Christi Aquifer Storage and Recovery District from the requirement
of developing a "desired future condition" of the aquifer in Chapter 36, Water Code.
7. Validate actions of the Lower Nueces Water Supply District to protect City's real
property interests near Lake Corpus Christi.
8. Create a dedicated funding source to implement long-term water management strategies
in the 2012 State Water Plan.
9. Allow a County to use its Texas Enterprise Zone designations for a company that is in the
extraterritorial jurisdiction of a City that is not in that County.
10. Allow Texas Enterprise Zone designations to be broken down into halves or quarters.
11. Constitutional amendment authorizing gaming at destination locations in Texas.
12. Eliminate or reduce the population threshold in the Local Government Code and
Government Code to allow smaller municipalities flexibility in contracting available to
larger municipalities.
Page 5 of 37
13. Amend Chapter 451, Transportation Code, to change city appointment to rapid
transportation authority board representing transportation disadvantaged individuals.
14. Stop non -transportation -related diversions from Fund 6 (State Gasoline Tax).
No legislation needed.
ACTIVELY SUPPORT
1. Limitation on boating sales tax to create incentive for large boats to be registered in
Texas.
2. Pass a constitutional amendment (authorize referendum) to protect local governments
from unfunded mandates.
3. Oppose further cuts in Mental Health and Mental Retardation (MHMR) funding.
4. Fair and equitable school finance system that strives for excellence, maximizes local
control and encourages students to achieve academic success and prepares them for
career opportunities in the future.
5. Texas should enhance existing formula funding to increase efficiency and encourage
graduates from Texas universities and community colleges to support the critical role of
providing a skilled workforce for the Texas economy.
6. Reinstate the dispersal of Law Enforcement Officers Standards and Education (LEOSE)
funds to law enforcement entities across the state to defer the cost of the required
continuing education of Texas peace officers.
7. Authorize sobriety checkpoints and other driving while intoxicated (DWI) prevention and
enforcement tools without limitation to population, including the use of ignition
interlocks on those convicted of a DWI offense.
8. Amend Section 28.08 the Texas Penal Code, to enhance prosecution of graffiti cases in
which the offender continues repeating the offense. If it is shown on the trial of the
offense that the defendant has been previously convicted of two or more offenses under
this section, then the current offense is enhanced to the next highest degree (except for a
felony of the first degree offense).
9. Return back into the Texas Transportation Code the penalty of a $200 fine for driving a
vehicle without a license plate.
10. Amend Section 38.04, Texas Penal Code, to increase the penalty for those suspects who
flee from law enforcement on foot and while doing so, enter into a building or habitation
without consent of the owner. Establish the penalty of a State Jail Felony when the
components of the offense include the act of a suspect fleeing into a building and
Page 6 of 37
establish a Third Degree Felony when a suspect flees into a residence, both without
effective consent of the owner.
ACTIVELY OPPOSE
1. Changes to the Public Education and Government one percent franchise fee for state
cable franchises.
2. Flow control restrictions in solid waste management.
3. Changes in funding or structure that might weaken the long-term viability and actuarial
soundness of the Texas Municipal Retirement System (TMRS) and limit or restrict a
municipality's benefit flexibility.
4. Changes to the school start date.
5. Limitations on local control and restrictions on city's extra -territorial jurisdiction.
6. Revenue Caps or erosion of local control over budgeting process;
7. Limits on land use regulatory authority;
8. Limits on building and construction permit fees;
9. Reduction in revenue collected for right of way rental (i.e. Franchise fees); and
10. Elimination or limits on the use of economic development tools.
ENDORSE
1. Benefit plan flexibility.
2. Continuation of economic development incentives and funding for the Governor's Office.
3. Continuation of funding for State agencies that provide critical services in the Coastal
Bend, including Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Texas Commission on the Arts,
Texas Historical Commission, Texas Health and Human Services agencies, Texas
Department of Transportation, Texas General Land Office, Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality, Texas Department of Public Safety, and others.
4. Amend Section 551.002(c), Local Government Code, to remove the restriction on when a
home rule municipality can protect streams, watersheds, and aquifers in the city's
extraterritorial jurisdiction.
Page 7 of 37
APPENDIX A
City of Corpus Christi
State Legislative Priority Summaries
Page 8 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIORITY
Problem Description:
Background:
The Texas Windstorm Insurance Association's (TWIA) growth in the
last five to seven years has made it one of the biggest insurers on the
Texas Coast, shifting TWIA's role from "residual" market to the only
market in some areas. Interested parties have expressed concern about
TWIA's overall structure and funding mechanisms, given the
tremendous growth of TWIA. The Joint Interim Committee to Study
Seacoast Territory Insurance was appointed to assess alternate ways
of providing windstorm insurance to businesses and homeowners
along the coastline.
The Texas windstorm insurance program was created in 1971 and its
statutory authority can be found in Chapter 2210, Texas Insurance
Code. The stated purpose in statute for TWIA is the provision of an
adequate market for windstorm and hail insurance along the Texas
coast. TWIA is intended to serve as a residual insurer of last resort for
windstorm and hail insurance, is not supposed to be a direct
competitor in the private market, and only provide windstorm and hail
insurance coverage to those who are unable to obtain that coverage in
the private market. TWIA provides windstorm and hail insurance in
14 "first tier" Texas coastal counties: Aransas, Brazoria, Calhoun,
Cameron, Chambers, Galveston, Jefferson, Kenedy, Kleberg,
Matagorda, Nueces, Refugio, San Patricio, Willacy, and a portion of
Harris County. Nueces County represents 18 percent of the policies in
force with TWIA (almost $13 billion in building and contents
covered) behind only Galveston and Brazoria Counties.
TWIA is composed of all property insurers licensed to do business in
Texas. There are nine members on the TWIA Board of Directors and
one additional member — a licensed engineer - who serves as a
nonvoting member to advise the board on issues related to the
inspection process. The board has four insurance industry
representatives. Of the five remaining members, four must reside in
the first tier and at least one must be a licensed property and casualty
agent. The final member must come from a non -coastal area. Former
State Representative Gene Seaman and former Port Aransas Mayor
Georgia Neblett serve on the TWIA Board. TWIA is run by a General
Page 9 of 37
Manager.
TWIA Ex • osures, Policies & Premiums Written
Dwelling
Mobile
Homes
Non -
Dwelling
Totals
$54,938,217,667
$30,613,176
$12,796,872,847
$67,765,703,690
229,549
692
13,296
243,537
$59,195,536,040
$37,829,968
$12,815,498,419
$72,048,864,427
244,941
813
13,297
259,051
Source: Texas Windstorm Insurance Association Overview, by TDI,
4/25/12
Quarterly Statistical Report as of 3/31/11 and 3/31/12 from Texas
Windstorm Insurance Association
Paying covered losses
Loss claims made by insured property owners are paid from:
(1) premiums and other revenues,
(2) catastrophe reserve trust fund (CRTF) - The CRTF was created by
the Legislature in 1993 to fund losses in excess of premiums. The
balance in the CRTF as of 3131112 was $147,962,563.
(3) reinsurance (if any) - TWIA, has a reinsurance policy in effect
from June 1, 2011 through May 31, 2012 in the amount of $636
million in excess of a $1.6 billion retention.
(4) pre -event and post -event bonds sold by TWIA. Class 1 bonds are
pre- or post -event bonds and are limited to one billion dollars per
catastrophe year. Class 1 bonds must be paid back within 14 years.
Class 2 bonds are post -event bonds and are limited to one billion
dollars per catastrophe year. Class 3 bonds are post -event bond and
are limited to $500 million per catastrophe year. Class 2 and 3 bonds
must be paid back within 10 years.
Rates/Premiums
TWIA rates must be reasonable, adequate, not unfairly discriminatory,
and nonconfiscatory as to any class of insurer. Rates must consider
prior loss experience and potential losses, operating expenses, profit
and contingencies, the cost to issue and repay Class 1 bonds, and
other relevant factors. Residential and Commercial rates are filed
annually with TDI. The average rate change is capped at ±10% than
the rate in effect on the date TWIA files with TDI. The rate for an
Page 10 of 37
individual rating class is capped at ± 15%. TWIA may also change
rates ± 5% under a file and use system.
Separation of residential rates from benchmark rates
NOTE: 10.0% cap removed due to catastrophes
Source: Texas Windstorm Insurance Association Overview, by TDI,
4/25/12
Page 11 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIORITY
Problem Description:
The radar used to track both general aviation, commercial and
military aviation take -offs, landings, and approaches at the
Corpus Christi International Airport receives interference from
a number sources, including wind turbines. The Joint Airport
Zoning Board has limited authority to address these land-based
interferences in areas five miles off the ends of each runway
and 1 �/2 miles from the centerline of each runway, but have no
authority for areas further away. Encroachments to military
installations and equipment jeopardize the health, safety and
welfare of the traveling public and weaken the standing of the
base for future Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
activities.
Background:
The Joint Airport Zoning Board was formed jointly by Nueces
County and the City of Corpus Christi in May 1957. San
Patricio County was added to it in 1979. The board has met
sporadically, as needed, over the last 45 years. It was re-
activated in mid -2012. The Board is being re -activated to
address the growing conflicts with interferences. The majority
of the radar and electromagnetic spectrum interferences come
from wind turbines within 25 miles of the airport radar.
The Corpus Christi International Airport's radar controls
general aviation, commercial and military training flights. The
Corpus Christi International Airport, Naval Air Station —
Corpus Christi, Naval Air Station Kingsville and their outlay
landing fields have approximately 800,000 operations
combined— that is take -offs and landings of commercial,
military and unmanned aircraft — more than the Dallas -Fort
Worth International Airport. Approximately 60 percent of the
100,000 operations at the Corpus Christi International Airport
are conducted by the military aircraft in our area.
Encroachments, either on land in the form of developments, or
in the airspace in the form of navigational interferences,
severely weakens a military base's standing for future Base
Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC) -type activities.
While other states, such as Oklahoma, Louisiana, Florida, and
Virginia, are investing in efforts to buy out land encroachments,
Page 12 of 37
and development rights to avoid conflicts with base missions
and operations, Texas communities do not have the tools
needed — yet — to address concerns.
A Department of Defense report stated: "Wind turbines in close
proximity to military training, testing, and development sites and
ranges can adversely impact the "train and equip" mission of the
Department. Existing processes to include engagement with local
and regional planning boards and development approval
authorities should be employed to mitigate such potential
impacts."
Page 13 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIORITY
Problem Description:
Background:
a3
The next round of Base Re -alignment and Closure (BRAC) of
military installations is anticipated to occur in 2015. There has been
no statewide coordinated effort to protect Texas military installations
by assisting with infrastructure improvements, such as electric, water
and wastewater utilities, to improve operational efficiency; enhancing
the strategic military mission of a base, or providing funding to
purchase development rights and outright land purchases to remove
encroachments that might threaten the future viability of a base.
Numerous states, including Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana,
North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Washington are actively investing in
initiatives to strengthen the standing of military installations in those
respective states prior to the next round of base re -alignment and
closures. The Pentagon is expected to cut approximately $487 billion
over the next 10 years. The Army is expected to shrink from 562,000
soldiers to 490,000 soldiers. The Marine Corps is expected to shrink
by 20,000 Marines to 182,000.
Governor Rick Perry's office is examining the possibility of
recommending both statutory revisions and making appropriations to
the Military Preparedness Council that would proactively assist
military bases prepare and prevent BRAC actions in Texas.
One model Texas could follow is called Florida Forever, which
provides funds to acquire land and conservation easements near
military installations that both protect important conservation areas
and prevent encroachment. Additionally, they enhance Florida's
ability to attract federal Department of Defense Readiness and
Environmental Protection Initiative (REPT) funds to help buffer
military installations. Without the buffering, encroachment could
make Florida bases vulnerable to closure.
Naval Air Station -Corpus Christi, the Corpus Christi Army Depot and
Naval Air Station -Kingsville not only have significant military value,
but are major employers in the Coastal Bend. Military from all
branches of the service, civil service employees and contractors now
work at NAS Corpus Christi. The military's regional economic impact
has been measured at $3.6 billion. The CCAD alone contributes about
Page 14 of 37
12 percent of the local Corpus Christi economy, with a $2.171 billion
economic impact. However, there are challenges, such as
incompatible land use encroachments, aging infrastructure, and
competition for pilot training from other bases.
Texas efforts have previously assisted communities impacted by after
BRAC decisions to close military bases in Texas (for example, Kelly
Air Force Base and Naval Station Ingleside). It has fallen to local
governments and community organizations to fund efforts to protect
individual military bases. A recent study by Texas A&M University -
Corpus Christi's College of Business and EDA University Center on
the impacts to San Patricio County from the previous BRAC that
closed Naval Station Ingleside stated:
"Historical data depict a vivid picture of the impact of the
closure of Naval Station Ingleside on San Patricio County,
which witnessed a loss of over 3,000 residents during that
process. In addition to those jobs eliminated directly by the
federal government, the county lost more than 850 jobs, or
about 3 percent of its workforce. While the actual impact
seemed more tenuous than most forecasts, the economic pain
felt by local residents and business owners far exceeded their
gains in tax savings from BRAC."
Page 15 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIORITY
Problem Description:
As the population of Texas grows, the need for new
transportation infrastructure to address congestion and improve
mobility and connectivity is not being met by the existing
funding system. An average of 30,000 more vehicles are added
to Texas roads every month due to population growth. Total
miles traveled and population growth far exceed the growth in
new highway capacity.
The state tax on gasoline and diesel has not been raised in more
than 20 years and inflation has reduced its purchasing power by
40%. The state (TxDOT) is about to run out of borrowing
capacity for its highway projects. Funding options for local
governments that are willing to take on a bigger share of the
transportation infrastructure demand are limited by statute.
Famed Texas economist Ray Perryman said: "...The quality of
roadways affects productivity and quality of life through time
lost sitting in traffic. As traffic congestion worsens, it can have
a negative effect on future development across a spectrum of
industries..."
Background:
According to the Texas Department of Transportation
(TxDOT), the state's main source of highway funding, the 20 -
cent -per -gallon motor fuel tax, is generating only about $2.6
billion a year -- far less than adequate for a state that, by one
estimate, needs $14 billion a year to keep up with growth in
population and jobs. One option is to raise vehicle registration
fees by $50 a year, which is estimated to yield about $1.1
billion in added annual revenue. The Texas Association of
Business supports increasing the state vehicle registration fee.
Several key lawmakers, including new Senate Finance
Committee Chairman Senator Tommy Williams and House
Transportation Committee member Representative Drew Darby
expressed support for the increase publicly.
TxDOT believes solving the state's current funding problems
will require a multi-level approach, with all Texans involved in
the planning process. One study indicates that Texas should be
Page 16 of 37
investing more than $19 billion each year (on average) in the
state's highways, transit, aviation, marine, rail, bicycle, and
pedestrian systems to meet the anticipated growth in
population, trade, and related traffic expected between now and
2035.
The current Texas constitution does not allow counties to issue
bonds for transportation infrastructure projects. The 82nd Texas
Legislature proposed a constitutional amendment (HJR
63/Proposition 4) in 2011 to authorize counties to use this
important financing tool to expand and improve transportation
options for local communities, but it was defeated by voters
(59.73% against to 40.26% for). This financing tool may be
resurrected with revisions during the 83rd Regular Legislative
Session in 2013.
Other funding options have been up for discussion during
previous legislative sessions and during the interim, including:
• increasing the statewide motor fuels tax by adjusting it
to annual inflation;
• local -option motor fuels tax;
• local -option vehicle registration fee;
• replacing the existing motor fuels tax with a vehicle
miles traveled tax;
• shifting the motor vehicle sales tax to highway
construction;
• expanded authority to use public-private partnerships;
• additional state and local bonding authority;
• establishing transportation reinvestment zones;
• toll roads.
In the Coastal Bend, the replacement of the Harbor Bridge is a
prime example of a project that could benefit greatly if cities
and counties were given access to a variety of financing and
revenue generating tools and were empowered to tailor
community -specific strategies to partner with the Texas
Department of Transportation on everything from right-of-way
acquisition, engineering, design, permitting, construction, and
maintenance.
Page 17 of 37
Page 18 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIORITY
Problem Description:
Background:
Current Water Code requires all groundwater conservation
districts (GCDs) to establish every five years the desired future
condition of the aquifer from which the GCD draws its water.
The desired future condition process requires extensive
groundwater availability modeling, studies, public hearings and
notices, which is very expensive.
The Corpus Christi ASR District was created by the 79th Texas
Legislature in 2005 by Senate Bill 1831. It became effective on
June 17, 2005.
The requirement in Chapter 36, Water Code, to establish the
Desired Future Condition of an aquifer, was created by the 79th
Legislature in 2005 by House Bill 1763. It became effective on
September 1, 2005.
The Corpus Christi ASR District is the only ASR District in
Texas. The El Paso Public Service Board, the San Antonio
Water System and the Kerr County GCD all have ASR projects,
but not districts.
The purpose of the Corpus Christi ASR District is to use the
Gulf Coast aquifer to store surface water transported by
pipeline and pumped into the aquifer. Sec. 8811.052, Special
District Local Laws Code, prohibits recovering more water
from the aquifer than the amount stored, so the District should
not impact the desired future condition of the aquifer.
The Corpus Christi ASR District fully participates and supports
the desired future condition process for Groundwater
Management Area (GMA) 16, which was submitted in 8/30/10.
The Corpus Christi ASR District is prohibited from imposing a
tax or issuing bonds, so it has no mechanism to pay for required
modeling, studies, and notice requirements by the desired future
conditions process.
Page 19 of 37
Page 20 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIORITY
As part of its dissolution activities, the Lower Nueces Water
Supply District (District) was supposed to transfer its assets to
the City of Corpus Christi (City) by August 1, 1986.
Documentation of the District formally conveying the assets
back to the City have not been located. Recording of those real
property asset transfers was completed, although not recorded
at the count courthouse in Atascosa, San Patricio, Live Oak and
Jim Wells counties for approximately 25 years due to records
being inadvertently misplaced. Once discovered, the City
properly recorded those transactions in the respective counties.
To avoid any potential adverse possession claims against the
City, a validation act is needed to perfect the land transfers
from the now -dissolved District back to the City.
In 1949, the Lower Nueces Water Supply District was formed
to serve as the financing vehicle for construction of the Wesley
Seale Dam the impounding dam for Lake Corpus Christi. The
City of Corpus Christi conveyed certain of its land rights (fee
simple title and easements) and other assets to the District and signed
a note in the amount of $2,071,165, all of which was confirmed
by voters in an election on December 13, 1952. The City paid off
the note and in 1985, State Senator Carlos Truan and State
Representative Ted Roberts passed SB 1254 to require the
District to discharge any remaining debts, convey all of its assets
to the City by August 1, 1986, and then dissolve the District.
Records of the District formally conveying the assets back to
the City have not been found. Research in 2010 as part of
lawsuit involving illegal construction of a dam on the City's
flood easement, uncovered boxes of missing real property
transactions conveying District lands back to the City. The City
immediately set out to have those transactions recorded in the
respective county deed records.
Page 21 of 37
Page 22 of 37
Problem Description:
The population of Texas is booming (expected to increase 82
percent between 2010 and 2060) and there is insufficient water
supply to serve the municipal, irrigation, manufacturing,
livestock, mining, and steam -electric power needs of that
growing population. In addition, the State does not have a long-
term, affordable and sustainable method of financing water
management strategies in the State Water Plan.
Background:
According to the 2012 State Water Plan developed by the 16
regional water planning groups through the Texas Water
Development Board (TWDB), in serious drought conditions,
Texas does not and will not have enough water to meet the
needs of its people, its businesses, and its agricultural
enterprises.
The Coastal Bend Regional Water Planning Area includes 11
counties, portions of the Nueces River Basin, and its adjoining
coastal basins, including the Nueces Estuary. The region's
largest economic sectors are service, retail trade, government,
and the petrochemical industry. Corpus Christi is the region's
largest metropolitan area. The next largest cities in the region
are Kingsville, Alice, Beeville, Portland, and Robstown.
The Coastal Bend Regional Water Planning Group
recommended a variety of water management strategies to meet
future needs including two proposed off -channel reservoirs,
groundwater development, interbasin transfers of surface water
from the Colorado River Basin, brackish and seawater
desalination, re -use, and conservation. The total capital costs
estimated to implement the recommended water management
strategies in Region N is $656 million.
According to the TWDB's legislative recommendation to the
83rd Texas Legislature:
The estimated total capital cost of the 2012 State Water
Plan, representing the capital costs of all water
management strategies recommended in the 2011
regional water plans, is $53 billion. Based on surveys
conducted as part of the planning process, water
Page 23 of 37
providers will need nearly $27 billion in state financial
assistance to implement strategies for municipal water
user groups.
In response to the 2007 State Water Plan, the Legislature
has authorized $1.67B to provide funding for state water
plan projects through three of the TWDB 's financial
assistance programs. To date, TWDB has provided over
$974,487,000 million in low-interest loans and grants to
implement 35 projects through 44 loans or grants across
the state. Once fully implemented, these projects will
supply over 1.5 million acre-feet of water needed during
times of drought to millions of Texans. In 2011, the 82nd
Texas Legislature authorized adding funding to finance
approximately $100 million in state water plan projects.
These funds will be available during state fiscal years
2012 and 2013. TWDB has also provided over $500
million in funding to implement water management
strategies recommended in the 2007 State Water Plan
through other loan programs not specifically targeting
State Water Plan projects.
The number of fully implemented projects today, 65, shows
a significant increase from the 21 projects that the 2007
State Water Plan reported had been implemented from the
2002 State Water Plan. The implementation of many of
these projects would not have been possible without the
funding provided by the Texas Legislature through
TWDB 's financial programs.
A long-term, affordable and sustainable method of
financing the State Water Plan is needed to increase
implementation the State Water Plan and alleviate the
reliance on general revenue to fund the Plan.
If an entity seeks state assistance to implement a water
management strategy in the State Water Plan, it would seek
funding through three TWDB programs: the Water
Infrastructure Fund, the State Participation Program, and the
Economically Distressed Areas Program.
In previous legislative interim committee analyzed a number of
funding options, but none have been enacted into law:
• a state sales tax increase;
• a water conservation and development fee;
• a water rights fee;
Page 24 of 37
• a water connection fee; and
• a sales tax on bottled water
The City of Corpus Christi is a member of an organization
known as H2O4Texas, which includes water customers and
water providers, as well as representatives from the public and
private sectors. H2O4Texas is committed to mobilizing public
support for full implementation of the State Water Plan.
Page 25 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIOR
The current Texas Enterprise Zone statute prevents a county
from designating a company to receive the benefit of the
enterprise zone if the project is located in the extraterritorial
jurisdiction (ETJ) of a city that is not located in the county that
nominates the project. For example, San Patricio County is
unable to nominate a company for enterprise zone benefits if
that company will be located in Corpus Christi's ETJ in San
Patricio County.
According to the Governor's Economic Development and
Tourism Division, the Texas Enterprise Zone Program is an
economic development tool for local communities to partner
with the State of Texas to promote job creation and significant
private investment that will assist economically distressed areas
of the state. Approved projects are eligible to apply for state
sales and use tax refunds on qualified expenditures.
A distressed county is defined by statute as one that has a
poverty rate above 15.4 percent; one in which at least 25.4
percent of the adult population does not hold a high school
diploma or high school equivalency certificate; and one that has
an unemployment rate that has remained above 4.9 percent
during the preceding five years.
The level and amount of sales and use tax refunds a qualified
business may receive is related to the capital investment it
makes and the jobs created at the qualified business site.
Page 26 of 37
local community must nominate a company as an Enterprise
Project to be eligible to participate in the Enterprise Zone
rogram. Texas law limits the number of allocations that may
be awarded to local communities per biennium. Corpus Christi
as nine (9) allocations. Nueces County and San Patricio
County have six (6) allocations available each biennium.
orpus Christi always has more demand for enterprise zone
allocations than spots available.
In order to qualify a project for the Enterprise Zone Program,
local communities must offer incentives to the project such as
ax abatement, tax increment financing, and one-stop
ermitting.
ommunities may nominate projects, for a designation period
p to five years, non-inclusive of a 90 -day window prior to the
application deadline. Employment and capital investment
ommitments must be incurred and met within this timeframe.
wo years ago, Rep. Connie Scott authored HB 1560 to allow a
ounty to nominate for designation as an enterprise project a
roject by a qualified business that is located in the county and
in the ET] of a municipality primarily located in another
ounty.
Page 27 of 37
, •
•
Page 28 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIORITY
The current Texas Enterprise Zone statute is targeted to projects
that promote job creation and significant private investment.
The program only allows for full allocations, which limits a
community's ability to recruit smaller scale, but still significant
economic development projects. Allowing for full, half or
quarter designations, a community has maximum flexibility to
target economic development activities. The half or quarter
designations would not apply to the double or triple jumbo
designations.
According to the Governor's Economic Development and
Tourism Division, the Texas Enterprise Zone Program is an
economic development tool for local communities to partner
with the State of Texas to promote job creation and significant
private investment that will assist economically distressed areas
of the state. Approved projects are eligible to apply for state
sales and use tax refunds on qualified expenditures.
A distressed county is defined by statute as one that has a
poverty rate above 15.4 percent; one in which at least 25.4
percent of the adult population does not hold a high school
diploma or high school equivalency certificate; and one that has
an unemployment rate that has remained above 4.9 percent
during the preceding five years.
The level and amount of sales and use tax refunds a qualified
business may receive is related to the capital investment it
makes and the jobs created at the qualified business site.
Page 29 of 37
A local community must nominate a company as an Enterprise
roject to be eligible to participate in the Enterprise Zone
Program. Texas law limits the number of allocations that may
be awarded to local communities per biennium. Corpus Christi
1 as nine (9) allocations. Nueces County and San Patricio
County have six (6) allocations available each biennium.
Corpus Christi always has more demand for enterprise zone
allocations than spots available.
In order to qualify a project for the Enterprise Zone Program,
local communities must offer incentives to the project such as
tax abatement, tax increment financing, and one-stop
ermitting.
Communities may nominate projects, for a designation period
up to five years, non-inclusive of a 90 -day window prior to the
application deadline. Employment and capital investment
commitments must be incurred and met within this timeframe.
Page 30 of 37
Problem Description:
There are limited types of legal gaming in Texas. Texas exports
billions in revenues to other states, thousands of jobs and
misses an economic development opportunity by prohibiting
casino gambling. Casino gambling can only become legal by
amending the Texas Constitution, which requires a 2/3rds vote
of both chambers (House and Senate) and a majority vote by
the voters of Texas in a constitutional amendment election.
Background:
The Texas Gaming Association states: "According to some
estimates, Texans spend close to $3.5 billion annually in other
states enjoying casino gaming destinations." Texans make up
nearly 44 percent of the gaming market in Louisiana and almost
37 percent of the market in Oklahoma. Over 80 percent of
Texans live within a three hour drive of a casino, not including
horse and greyhound racetracks. According to the most recent
comprehensive data available, in 2007, over 2.6 million Texans
visited Las Vegas spending a total of $3.8 billion during their
stay in the Las Vegas market.
A number of gaming and tourism websites reference studies
that estimate that in 2009 casinos located adjacent to Texas
generate the following revenues:
• New Mexico, $1.03 billion;
• Oklahoma, $3.21 billion, and
• Louisiana, about $2.5 billion.
It is believed that much of this revenue is from Texans crossing
over to neighboring states. A 2007 study reported that
approximately 2.6 million Texans travelled to the city of Las
Vegas and were estimated to have spent nearly $3.8 billion
dollars during their stay.
The State of Texas regulates three games of chance: pari-
mutuel wagering on horses and dogs, bingo and the state
lottery. Pari-mutuel wagering on horses and dogs was approved
by the voters of Texas in 1987. In 2000, the industry reached a
peak with attendance of 3.3 million and wagering of $633 million
on live and simulcast racing. The industry was hit in 2001 with the
negative impacts of 9/11 and significantly increased competition
from tracks in the surrounding states. By 2009, track attendance in
Page 31 of 37
Texas had declined 35 percent from 2000 while wagering had
plummeted 37 percent. The lottery was authorized by voters in
1991 and the lottery sales began in 1992.
Off -shore casino gambling was passed by the Texas Legislature in
1991. The Texas Treasure cruise ship operated out of Port Aransas
and Aransas Pass from Iate 2000 to May 2008.
During the 82nd Regular Session in 2011, a Rep. Chente
Quintanilla of El Paso authored House Joint Resolution (HJR)
43 to authorize the Texas Legislature to legalize and regulate
the conduct of gaming in the State of Texas. Gambling would
be legalized in counties that by local option elections approve
of the conduct of gaming in their county. This would allow the
idea of gaming to be handle on a county by county basis, much
like the way counties throughout the state have chosen to be
either dry or wet counties in relation to the sale of alcohol.
Page 32 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIORITY
Problem Description:
Background:
Eliminating or reducing the population thresholds in two
statutes (Sec. 252.048, Local Government Code, dealing with
change orders for public works contracts and Sec. 2267.354,
Government Code, dealing with limitations on the number of
design -build projects) will give smaller cities (or at least those
of 300,000 or more) the same flexibility that larger cities of
500,000 or more have in contracting.
Currently, cities of less than 500,000 are permitted to have
fewer design -build public works contracts and are not limited in
the dollar volume of change orders an administrative officer can
approve. Mid-size cities, like Corpus Christi, have the
contracting expertise and project management experience, to
award more design -build contracts and approve larger change
orders just like larger cities of 500,000 or more. The
population bracket limitation is arbitrary and adds costly
and unnecessary delays to public works projects.
Change Orders
In 1973, the Legislature first authorized a change order for a
public works project by an administrative official if the change
order increased or decreased by $5,000 or less. The Legislature
changed increased the charge order approval level to $15,000 in
1981, to $25,000 in 1995, and finally to $50,000 in 2011. A
different bill in 2011 allowed cities of 500,000 or more to
approve change orders on public works projects of $100,000 or
less. From 1973 to 2011 (38 years), the only limitation on an
administrative official's ability to approve a change order was
the dollar size of the change order - not the population size of a
city.
Limiting administrative approval of public works change
orders causes unnecessary and costly delays to projects.
For almost 40 years, cities have had the statutory authority
and managed administrative approval of contract change
orders without the population bracket limitations. The City
of Corpus Christi routinely handles administrative
Page 33 of 37
approval of change orders, but the arbitrary population
bracket limitation handcuffs City staff on larger public
works contracts.
Design -Build
In 2007, the 80th Texas Legislature passed HB 1886 authorizing
cities, counties, special districts and authorities to use design -
build for civil works projects, including: roads and streets;
bridges; utilities; water supply projects; water and
wastewater plants; water distribution and wastewater
conveyance facilities; airport runways and taxiways;
storm drainage and flood control projects; and transit
facilities. The bill had a scheduled phase-in and population
brackets that allowed larger cities with more resources to
implement the program first and provide experience and
examples for smaller entities.
For the first four years of the scheduled phase-in (2008-
2012), a governmental entities of certain populations are
limited in the number of design -build projects they can
enter into --
500,000 or more - three (3);
100,000 or more, but less than 500,000 - two (2).
After the first four years of the scheduled phase-in (2013
and beyond), a governmental entities of certain
populations are limited in the number of design -build
projects they can enter into —
500,000 or more - six (6);
100,000 or more, but less than 500,000 - four (4).
The City has pursued design -build projects under HB
1886. Design -build is a process the City is eager to pursue
for a number of high profile projects that are under
discussion and negotiation, but for which details cannot be
released at this time. Being limited to four projects for the
foreseeable future will hinder its ability to maximize its
economic development and public works plans.
Page 34 of 37
Page 35 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIORITY
The statute does not require a city to appoint someone who is
transportation disadvantaged (i.e. elderly, persons with
disabilities or low-income individuals) to serve on metropolitan
rapid transit authority board. The statute authorizes a city to
appoint someone to "represent the interests" of a transportation
disadvantaged individual.
Chapter 451, Transportation Code, affects the Cities of Austin,
Corpus Christi, Houston, and San Antonio, and their
appointment to the rapid transit authority serving their
respective municipality (Capital Metro, the B, Metro and VIA).
Corpus Christi resident and long-time disability rights advocate
Abel Alonzo believes transportation disadvantaged individuals
deserve to represent themselves on the transit authority boards.
Previous councils have appointed non -transportation
disadvantaged individuals to the board.
Page 36 of 37
CATEGORY: PRIORITY
Previous legislatures have taken state gasoline taxes that could
have been used to pave new roads, ease traffic congestion, or
improve transportation infrastructure, have instead been
appropriated to supplement other state agency budgets.
Every year $700 million is diverted from the State Highway
Trust Fund to non -transportation related purposes. These
diversions combined with the $1.3 billion in debt service that
TXDOT pays every year, is further slowing our state's ability to
build and maintain roadway infrastructure. The Chambers
support the elimination of diversion for all non -transportation
programs that are not directly associated with the maintenance
and expansion of the state highway system, except for the 25
percent diversion to education required by the Texas
Constitution.
Fund 6 is the state's primary highway funding mechanism,
collecting the vast majority of highway -related revenue from
federal reimbursements, state motor fuels taxes, motor vehicle
registrations, and various fees. The Legislature may appropriate
funds from Fund 6 for various highway -related purposes, in
accord with constitutionally and statutorily established limits.
State statutes further restrict the dollar amount of bonds that
may be issued on the fund's credit, and the Texas Constitution
requires that revenue from Fund 6 be used to pay minimum
necessary debt service on bonds and other public securities
secured by Fund 6.
Page 37 of 37