2025 · Regular session · House bill
HB303
HB303 lets existing Type A and Type B general-law cities with 500 or fewer residents seek a change to Type C status.
Official caption: Relating to the authority of a Type A or Type B general-law municipality to change to a Type C general-law municipality.
Official report lists House author(s): Vasut. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.
Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.
Bill highlights
Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.
- HB303 lets existing Type A and Type B general-law cities with 500 or fewer residents seek a change to Type C status.
- The change is optional, not automatic.
What does it do?
HB303 lets existing Type A and Type B general-law cities with 500 or fewer residents seek a change to Type C status. These labels describe forms of city government under state law. Previously, the conversion provision required at least 501 residents. The law removes that minimum but retains the upper limits: 4,999 residents for a Type A city and 999 for a Type B city. It took effect when the governor signed it on May 29, 2025. Final law · Official history
The change is optional, not automatic. Existing law still calls for a petition signed by at least 10 percent of the city’s qualified voters, an election ordered by the mayor, and approval by a majority of votes cast. Conversion adopts a commission form of government. Under the existing transition rules, the mayor keeps the remainder of the mayor’s term, two commissioners are elected, and the former governing-body offices are abolished after those commissioners qualify. HB303 does not change the separate population rules for an unincorporated community becoming a new Type C city. Conversion and incorporation rules · Commission-government transition
What changed along the way?
The bill’s policy did not change during passage. The introduced, House committee, House-passed, Senate committee and enrolled texts all remove the same 501-person minimum and retain the same maximums. Both committees reported it without amendments, and the official amendment page lists none. The final certified votes were 141–0 in the House, with two present but not voting, and 31–0 in the Senate. Introduced text · All versions · Amendment index · Final certifications
For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.
Official bill versions
Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.
Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?
Residents of very small existing cities gain another choice of governing structure. A mayor-and-two-commissioner arrangement may suit a community that wants fewer governing positions, but it also concentrates governing responsibility in fewer people. Any change still requires the local election process; the law does not establish that smaller government will save a particular city money. Existing Type C rules
The Legislative Budget Board anticipated no state fiscal impact and no significant local-government fiscal impact. That estimate does not mean an optional local election or administrative transition is cost-free. HB303 neither appropriates money nor requires every eligible city to convert. Latest posted fiscal note
Official sources
- Bill history and latest recorded action
- Bill versions, analyses and fiscal notes
- Action history and votes
- Amendment index
Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.