2025 Texas sessionsRegular and both called sessions have ended. This index covers House and Senate bills, not resolutions. Statuses come from official reports.

← Back to bills and search results

2025 · Regular session · House bill

HB5680

HB5680 creates Bayou Belle Municipal Management District No. 1 for a described 605.3082-acre tract in Liberty County.

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to the creation of the Bayou Belle Municipal Management District No. 1; granting a limited power of eminent domain; providing authority to issue bonds; providing authority to impose assessments, fees, and taxes.

Became law without signatureSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists House author(s): Holt. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.

Report an error ↗

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.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

HB5680 creates Bayou Belle Municipal Management District No. 1 for a described 605.3082-acre tract in Liberty County. It can finance and provide public improvements and services, including water, wastewater, drainage, roads, recreation and parking. It can contract for law enforcement, form a nonprofit corporation to help deliver projects, and support economic development through loans, grants, personnel and services. District services must supplement—not replace—the county’s existing services. The area is eligible for tax-increment and tax-abatement zones, but the act does not itself establish either zone.

The initial directors are Dez Carlson, Remard Mason and Kye Sampson, with terms ending June 1, 2027, and Anthony Hernandez and Kyle Clarke, with terms ending June 1, 2029. Thereafter, the five elected directors serve staggered four-year terms. Compensation is capped at $150 per board meeting and $7,200 per director per year, plus necessary and reasonable expense reimbursement.

Property taxes and property-tax-backed bonds require voter approval. The operating-tax rate cannot exceed the approved rate. The continuing tax for outstanding tax-backed bonds has no rate or amount limit specified in this act. Specified revenue- or contract-payment-backed bonds do not require a separate bond election. Applicable municipal consent is required before issuing bonds. Financing a service or improvement through assessments requires a petition signed by owners of a majority of assessed property value subject to assessment. Assessments can create personal liability and a property lien, subject to the specified priority for county, school and municipal property-tax liens.

The district may add or exclude land under the cited general laws. Division is permitted only when it has no outstanding bonded debt and is not imposing property taxes; newly divided districts cannot initially include land outside the act’s territory and need applicable voter financing approvals. Owners representing a majority of assessed property value subject to assessment, or a majority of the eligible surface area, may petition for dissolution. The board may also vote to dissolve, but outstanding debt, contractual payments and responsibility for public facilities must first be addressed.

The bill became law without the governor’s signature on June 20, 2025, effective September 1, 2025. It does not give the district eminent-domain power: the House concurrence vote of 90–47 fell below the two-thirds threshold, activating the prohibition instead of the conditional grant. Initial House passage was 84–47; Senate passage was 28–3. Sources: enrolled law and certified votes and official history and effective-date remarks.

What changed along the way?

The introduced bill required a dissolution petition from owners representing at least two-thirds of assessed property value or eligible surface area. The House substitute lowered both thresholds to a majority. The House-passed text retained that change. The April 30 committee minutes record adoption of the substitute; the May 10 minutes record reconsideration of the reporting vote, not adoption of another substitute.

The Senate substitute added the limitations in Water Code 54.209 to the proposed eminent-domain authority. Its operative text matches the enrolled act, but the final vote activated the separate no-eminent-domain provision. The amendment index lists no floor amendments; these were committee-substitute changes. All five versions appear in the text index.

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?

Landowners, residents, businesses and visitors could benefit from financed infrastructure and services. Property owners and users may bear taxes, assessments, fees and debt-related costs. Lowering the dissolution-petition threshold gives a qualifying majority an easier route to seek dissolution, but does not erase debts or public-facility responsibilities. The act does not set an actual tax rate, approve a specific project or establish that a financing election has occurred.

The latest May 27 fiscal note, covering the bill as passed by the second house, anticipates no significant state fiscal effect, assuming costs can be absorbed with existing resources. It cannot determine the district’s financial effect because its future actions and financing are unknown, and anticipates no fiscal effect on other local governments. All earlier indexed fiscal notes were reviewed. The latest note’s mention of possible eminent-domain costs does not override the final law’s prohibition. No dollar estimate or household tax calculation is provided.

Official sources

Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.