← Back to bills and search results
2025 · Regular session · House bill
HB5695
HB5695 creates Sayers Ranch Municipal Utility District on a described 252.94 acres in Bastrop County, around Sayers Road, Smith Road and Cirrus Lane.
Official caption: Relating to the creation of the Sayers Ranch Municipal Utility District; granting a limited power of eminent domain; providing authority to issue bonds; providing authority to impose assessments, fees, and taxes.
Official report lists House author(s): Gerdes. 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.
- HB5695 creates Sayers Ranch Municipal Utility District on a described 252.94 acres in Bastrop County, around Sayers Road, Smith Road and Cirrus Lane.
- The district must comply with applicable municipal-consent requirements.
- Property taxes and property-tax-backed bonds require voter approval.
- The act became law without the governor's signature on June 20, 2025, effective September 1, 2025.
What does it do?
HB5695 creates Sayers Ranch Municipal Utility District on a described 252.94 acres in Bastrop County, around Sayers Road, Smith Road and Cirrus Lane. The detailed legal boundary, rather than the district name, determines which land is included. This review does not independently resolve ownership or survey boundaries.
The district must comply with applicable municipal-consent requirements. It receives municipal-utility-district powers and authority to finance, build and maintain roads and related drainage. Voters must confirm creation and elect five permanent directors. Municipal consent required by applicable law must precede that election. The named temporary directors are Blake Scrivener, Lindsay Key, John Cox, Jeremy Brannon and Joe Daly. They serve until permanent directors are elected or four years after the act takes effect, whichever comes first. If those terms expire before an election, owners representing a majority of assessed real-property value may petition the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to appoint five named successors under the act’s renewal procedure. Permanent directors serve staggered four-year terms. Districts created by division under the cited general law inherit these powers and duties.
Property taxes and property-tax-backed bonds require voter approval. Tax-backed road bonds require approval from two-thirds of participating voters, and their principal at issuance cannot exceed one-fourth of assessed real-property value. Specified revenue- or contract-payment-backed obligations do not need a separate bond election; contract taxes require voter approval of the underlying contract. Operating-tax rates cannot exceed the approved rate. Taxes supporting outstanding tax-backed bonds have no rate or amount limit specified in this act. Road projects must meet applicable local standards, with state approval when the state will maintain the road.
The act became law without the governor’s signature on June 20, 2025, effective September 1, 2025. Although the caption refers to eminent domain, the district may not exercise it: the House’s 86–45 vote fell below the two-thirds threshold, activating the act’s prohibition. The Senate vote was 27–4. Sources: enrolled law and certified votes and official history.
What changed along the way?
The introduced bill, House committee report, House-passed text, Senate committee report and enrolled act contain the same operative provisions and boundary descriptions. Differences are printing matter and certifications, not policy amendments. Both committees reported without amendments; the amendment index lists none. The text index identifies all five versions.
The confirmation election, financing conditions and vote-dependent eminent-domain restriction were present from introduction. This briefing does not treat the caption’s proposed power as the law that actually took effect.
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, developers and future residents could benefit from district-financed infrastructure. District taxpayers and customers could bear taxes, fees, assessments and debt-service costs. The act does not itself set a tax rate, issue a bond, establish that a confirmation election has occurred or promise any particular project. The boundary description does not establish that neighboring subdivisions are entirely inside the district.
The May 6 introduced fiscal note and May 21 engrossed fiscal note anticipate no significant state fiscal effect, assuming costs can be absorbed with existing resources, and no effect on other local governments. They cannot determine district costs because future financing, charges and actions are unknown. Neither note gives a dollar estimate or a household tax calculation.
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.