According to he Legislative Budget Board (LBB) has determined that HB. 3332 would have no significant fiscal implication to the state. The LBB assumes that any costs associated with implementing the bill could be absorbed using existing resources, indicating that the establishment of the Maverick County Regional Mobility Authority (RMA) would not require additional state funding or appropriations.

From a local government perspective, the bill could have a positive fiscal impact on the Maverick County RMA if voters approve a fee through a referendum election as authorized by the bill. This potential revenue would help support transportation and mobility projects within the RMA's jurisdiction. However, the LBB also notes that other fiscal implications associated with the authority’s creation cannot be determined at this time. This uncertainty may stem from variables such as the level of voter support, the specific fee amount, and the scope of projects undertaken by the RMA.

In summary, while the bill is not expected to impose a financial burden on the state, it could generate local revenue if the fee is approved, with the extent of the financial impact dependent on future voter decisions and operational choices of the Maverick County RMA.

HB 3332 seeks to establish the Maverick County Regional Mobility Authority (RMA), which would give Maverick County the power to independently plan, finance, and implement transportation projects. While this aims to address local infrastructure needs, the proposal raises significant concerns related to limited government, free enterprise, and financial accountability.

The bill would create a new governmental entity with the authority to levy fees, expanding the scope of local government power. This contradicts the principle of limiting government intervention and risks setting a precedent for the creation of similar authorities across the state. Allowing regional mobility authorities to operate with fee-levying powers without the direct approval of the Texas Transportation Commission diminishes state-level oversight, raising questions about accountability.

Regional mobility authorities can inadvertently displace private sector initiatives by introducing public-sector competition into areas where private investment might otherwise address transportation needs. If a mobility project is economically viable, private companies would likely invest without needing government intervention. By utilizing public funds and imposing fees, the RMA may reduce market-driven solutions and create a subsidized competitor to private enterprise.

The bill authorizes the RMA to impose vehicle registration fees within Maverick County, contingent on voter approval. However, this still places a financial burden on residents, many of whom may not directly benefit from the specific transportation projects funded. Taxpayers would effectively be subsidizing a service that primarily benefits a minority of the population, raising equity concerns. The lack of clear cost-benefit analysis and transparency regarding project funding and fee structures further complicates the justification for such a financial commitment.

The bill does not include adequate safeguards to ensure the RMA's financial accountability and transparency. The board of directors would largely be appointed rather than elected, which may reduce public influence over decisions affecting fee structures and project priorities. Additionally, the initial exemption from Transportation Commission approval reduces checks and balances, allowing local officials to establish an authority without broader state scrutiny.

Given the expansion of government authority, potential suppression of private sector solutions, and financial impacts on residents, HB 3332 raises concerns that outweigh the potential benefits. To maintain limited government, protect free enterprise, and ensure fiscal responsibility, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on HB 3332.

• Individual Liberty: The bill indirectly impacts individual liberty by allowing the imposition of vehicle registration fees through a referendum election. While voters would have a say in whether the fee is adopted, once approved, it becomes a mandatory charge for vehicle owners within Maverick County. This financial imposition can reduce individual autonomy, particularly for those who may not benefit directly from the resulting infrastructure improvements. Additionally, the creation of a regional governmental body to manage transportation projects can reduce local control if the board of directors does not adequately represent the diverse interests of all residents.
• Personal Responsibility: A fundamental aspect of personal responsibility is that individuals are responsible for their own transportation choices. Whether it involves owning a vehicle, using private transit services, carpooling, or biking, each person should manage and fund their own mobility needs. HB 3332 shifts this responsibility from the individual to a regional government entity by establishing the Maverick County Regional Mobility Authority (RMA). This government body would have the authority to impose fees on vehicle registrations, effectively distributing the cost of transportation infrastructure across all county residents, regardless of whether they personally benefit from the improvements. This approach contradicts the principle of personal responsibility because it mandates that residents collectively fund infrastructure rather than allowing individuals to directly bear the cost of their own transportation choices. Instead of encouraging self-reliance and accountability, the bill imposes a one-size-fits-all solution that may not align with the needs or preferences of all community members. By creating a government-led mobility authority, HB 3332 reduces individual autonomy in transportation decisions and burdens those who may prefer private or alternative transit options.
• Free Enterprise: The creation of the Maverick County RMA can undermine free enterprise by introducing a government-funded entity into the realm of transportation, which might otherwise attract private investment. By financing projects through public fees, the RMA can crowd out potential public-private partnerships (PPPs) or entirely private solutions that could emerge in the absence of government intervention. Moreover, the authority’s ability to impose fees introduces a competitive disadvantage for private companies that do not have the same access to taxpayer funding. This situation runs contrary to the idea that the free market should determine viable transportation solutions without government subsidies.
• Private Property Rights: While the bill does not directly address or infringe upon private property rights, regional mobility authorities traditionally hold the power to acquire property through eminent domain for infrastructure projects. Although HB 3332 does not explicitly grant eminent domain authority, establishing the RMA sets the stage for future projects that could potentially affect property owners if the authority later seeks such powers or if they are implied under the existing Regional Mobility Authority Act. Additionally, the development of new infrastructure may indirectly influence land use and property values, sometimes disadvantaging current owners.
• Limited Government: HB 3332 clearly contradicts the principle of limited government by creating a new governmental entity with the power to levy fees and manage transportation projects. The bill’s provision that exempts the Maverick County RMA from requiring approval from the Texas Transportation Commission significantly reduces state oversight, allowing local officials to expand government functions without the same level of accountability. Moreover, once established, the RMA becomes a persistent bureaucratic entity that can continue to grow and levy fees long after the initial need has been addressed. This can lead to mission creep and expansion of government scope, conflicting with efforts to limit governmental power and intervention.

• HJR 144 (Enabling for)