County and municipal authorities; withdrawal from multi-jurisdiction authority authorized, taxes and distribution of monies from taxes further provided for
Summary
SB91 would give counties and municipalities a new legal path to leave certain legislatively created multijurisdiction authorities if the authority has no outstanding debt. A local governing body could do so by resolution, and after withdrawal it could create a replacement entity that operates only within its own boundaries and performs similar functions. The bill also allows the withdrawing county or municipality to redirect or otherwise control monies that had previously been distributed to the authority for use in its territory.
The bill further permits the local government to increase or decrease by up to two percentage points any tax collected in connection with the authority from which it withdrew. In addition, the multijurisdiction authority would be required to remit to the withdrawing entity a share of its unencumbered funds based on the proportion of the authority’s total funding that came from the withdrawing county or municipality. The act would take effect on October 1, 2026.
Impact
SB91 would amend the rules governing county and municipal participation in multijurisdiction authorities by creating an express withdrawal mechanism and by reallocating financial control after withdrawal. It would affect how locally collected tax revenues and previously distributed monies are handled, and it would impose a new remittance obligation on affected authorities. The bill would also indirectly affect local tax rates and the structure of service delivery by allowing a county or municipality to establish a successor entity to perform similar functions within its own borders.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill had generally favorable support in the Senate, with several motions passing unanimously and the bill passing third reading in the house of origin by a 17-5 vote after amendment. That pattern indicates broad support for the concept, though not complete consensus. No committee transcript is available, so the discussion record does not show detailed arguments for or against the bill.
Contention
The main points of contention appear to be the bill’s impact on regional governance and shared funding arrangements. Supporters likely view it as giving local governments more autonomy and flexibility to exit authorities that no longer serve their interests, while opponents may be concerned about fragmentation, disruption of regional services, and the fairness of reallocating authority funds and tax rates after withdrawal. The requirement that an authority remit unencumbered funds to a withdrawing entity could also be disputed because it affects the financial stability and obligations of the remaining authority members.