SB1921

Who can sign: a qualified petitioner must be employed in a management position overseeing a hotel’s operations, such as an owner or general manager, a regional manager, or a management-company employee overseeing that hotel. Each signer must provide a written statement of authority to enter a binding agreement concerning hotel operations on the owner’s behalf, and that statement must accompany the petition. This is not permission for any hotel employee to sign without authorization. Final law, Section 3.

Required support: the signers must represent more than 60% of the appraised value of hotel property liable for assessment, using the current appraisal roll, and either more than 60% of all hotels liable for assessment or more than 60% of the area of all real property liable for assessment. Exactly 60% is insufficient. The earlier special rule required record property owners and measured its alternative headcount by owners, rather than hotels. The general district petition rule of more than 50% is not the rule for these hotel-only petitions. Final law, Section 3; Earlier petition rules.

Districts and hotels covered: the retained Section 372.0035(a-1) covers municipal public improvement districts whose only businesses are one or more hotels. The bill repeals the separate older subsection listing particular municipal population ranges and hotel room-count thresholds; it does not abolish the retained hotel-only category. “Hotel” uses the Tax Code definition and expressly includes property that starts operating as a hotel after the district containing it is established. The incorporated definition generally covers buildings offering paid sleeping accommodations to the public, with exclusions for hospitals, sanitariums, nursing homes, specified institution-operated educational housing and oilfield portable units. Final law, Sections 1 and 4; Earlier district provisions; Incorporated hotel definition.

Project limits: for districts created after September 1, 2019, projects under this section remain limited to advertising, promotion or business recruitment directly related to hotels, now expressly notwithstanding the general improvement section. SB1921 also repeals subsection (e-1), which limited municipal projects under this section to purposes in Section 372.003(b)(13). That deleted cross-reference included a wider list of supplemental services; its repeal does not erase the retained limit for districts created after September 1, 2019. Final law, Sections 2 and 4; Earlier limits; General improvement provisions.

Transition and changes during passage: the new petition rules apply to establishment or renewal petitions filed on or after May 28, 2025; earlier petitions remain governed by the law when filed. The Senate committee substitute replaced the introduced affidavit requirement with a written statement and specified authority on the owner’s behalf, added later-opening hotels, added the project-limit revision and repeals, removed “taxable” from the land-area alternative and added renewal petitions to the transition rule. Those changes remained in the Senate-passed, House committee and final texts. No floor amendments are listed. The certified votes were 31–0 in the Senate and 107–34 in the House, with two House members present but not voting, meeting the immediate-effect threshold. Introduced; Senate committee substitute; Senate-passed; House committee; Final law, Sections 5–6 and certification; Version index; Amendment index; Official history.

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

Hotel owners can use authorized operating managers to support district petitions, while the written authorization and two-part support test constrain who can act and how much support is needed. Hotel-related promotion may benefit participating businesses, but this law does not guarantee more visitors or higher revenue. Property liable for district assessment remains relevant to the petition tests; SB1921 does not set a new assessment rate or quantify a hotel’s or guest’s bill. Final law, Sections 2–3; Petition cost and assessment disclosures.

The March 28 introduced-bill and April 3 committee-substitute fiscal notes anticipate no state fiscal implication and no significant local-government fiscal implication. They do not estimate individual hotel assessments, changes in visitor spending or private compliance costs. No actual district formation or renewal is verified here. Introduced fiscal note; Committee-substitute fiscal note.