HB 2458, which passed the House in March, was held up in the Senate after the Senate voted in favor of a substitute bill (SB 906), which would have extended TSPCB’s life an additional four years. That bill was introduced by Sen. Kim Brimer (R-Fort Worth).
A Senate-House Conference Committee was then assembled and met last week to hammer out a compromised version of HB 2458, which passed in the House 137-2 and in the Senate 30-0 on Friday.
The compromised bill established a structural pest control advisory committee consisting of nine members appointed by the commissioner, including: two members who are experts in structural pest control application; three members who represent the public; one member from an institution of higher education who is knowledgeable in the science of pests and pest control; one member who represents the interests of structural pest control operators and who is appointed based on recommendations provided by a trade association of operators; one member who represents the interests of consumers and who is appointed based on recommendations provided by consumer advocacy groups or associations; and the commissioner of state health services or the commissioner's designee.
Currently, the TSPCB is a nine-member group composed of three civilians, three pest control industry representatives and three state officials. “The new committee is very similar to (the existing one) but the difference is the Texas Structural Pest Control Board was a rulemaking organization. In this case, the new committee will just act in an advisory role,” said Mitch Wassom, president of Collins Services and president-elect, Texas Pest Control Association.
Unless HB 2458 is vetoed by Gov. Perry, the Texas Structural Pest Control Board will be abolished and its duties and powers will be transferred to the Texas Department of Agriculture by March 1, 2008.
Wassom said Texas PCOs should not expect major changes. “The laws governing structural pest control in the state of Texas will not change,” he said. “There will be some changes to things like maximum fines, processes on cease-and-desist orders and the appeals process, but the basic framework is the same. It’s not a situation where there will be a gap in regulations. I expect it will be a pretty seamless transition.”