← Back to bills and search results
2025 · Regular session · Senate bill
SB3048
SB3048 creates the Bluebonnet Hills Municipal Management District No. 1 in the Midlothian area of Ellis County to finance local improvements and services.
Official caption: Relating to the creation of the Bluebonnet Hills Municipal Management District No. 1; providing authority to issue bonds; providing authority to impose assessments, fees, and taxes; granting a limited power of eminent domain.
Official report lists Senate author(s): Birdwell. 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.
Read the full explanation ↓What does it do?
SB3048 creates the Bluebonnet Hills Municipal Management District No. 1 in the Midlothian area of Ellis County to finance local improvements and services. It authorizes taxes, assessments and borrowing through specified procedures, but the final legislative vote means the district does not receive eminent-domain power. Filed without the governor’s signature June 20, 2025, the law took effect September 1, 2025. Final law; Official history.
What changed along the way?
The new district initially contains two legally described tracts, stated as 206.024 and 242.375 acres. It supplements rather than replaces existing city services. Its authorized activities include water, wastewater, drainage, roads, recreation, parking and economic-development programs, including public loans and grants. It may contract for projects or law-enforcement services and establish a supporting nonprofit corporation. These are legal powers, not evidence that a project, grant or contract has actually been approved. Final law, sections 1–2.
Five elected directors serve staggered four-year terms. The law names the initial directors: Jake Weaver, Cassie Wagner and Dylan Suhy, whose initial terms expire June 1, 2027, and Melanie Wright and Haley Sheffield, whose initial terms expire June 1, 2029. Compensation may not exceed $150 per board meeting or $7,200 per director per year, apart from necessary and reasonable expense reimbursement. Final law, sections 4016.0201–.0203.
A district election must approve property taxes. An operations-and-maintenance tax cannot exceed the voter-approved rate. Property-tax-backed bonds also require election authorization; their repayment uses a continuing tax without a statutory rate or amount limit to meet the debt service. Before the first such bond issuance, the relevant municipalities must consent to district creation and inclusion of land as applicable law requires. That special consent condition does not apply anew to every later issuance. Revenue-backed bonds and qualifying contract-payment bonds can be issued without a bond election, subject to the referenced Water Code requirements. Final law, sections 4016.0501–.0506.
Financing services or improvements through assessments—charges against benefited property—requires a petition from owners of a majority of the assessed value of district real property subject to assessment. This is not a majority-of-residents test. Assessments can become liens and personal obligations, with priority except for county, school-district and municipal property-tax liens. General-law assessment procedures and exemptions remain relevant. The act also permits a special assessment-backed financing route when improvements will be transferred to, or operated and maintained by, a municipality or retail utility under an agreement made before the debt is issued. Final law, sections 4016.0401–.0402 and .0503.
Despite the bill caption and a conditional grant in the text, the district may not exercise eminent domain—the power to compel a property sale for public use. The grant required two-thirds approval of all elected members in both chambers. The House’s certified vote was 99–41, one vote short of the required 100, activating the act’s express no-eminent-domain alternative. Final law, section 4 and certified votes; Effective-provision remarks.
The district can add or exclude land through referenced procedures. It may divide into new districts only when it has no outstanding bonded debt and is not imposing property taxes; new districts must hold the required tax and tax-bond elections. Dissolution can follow a board majority or a petition from owners of two-thirds of assessed property value or qualifying land area, but outstanding debt, payment contracts and continuing public facilities must be addressed first. Final law, sections 4016.0309–.0310 and .0901.
The introduced, Senate-report, engrossed, House-report and enrolled versions have identical operative provisions, including the two boundary descriptions. The amendment index lists no floor amendments, and the version history lists no conference report. The no-eminent-domain result comes from the vote-triggered clause already in the bill, not from a floor amendment deleting the proposed power. Introduced text; Version history; Amendment index; Final law.
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?
The district provides another way to organize and finance infrastructure and development. Property owners may benefit from improvements but can also face future taxes, assessments, fees or debt-service costs if the required local steps are taken. The law does not itself show that a tax election has occurred, a tax rate has been set or bonds have been issued. It does not establish a separate sales-tax or hotel-tax chapter. Final law.
The sole posted fiscal note anticipates no state fiscal impact and no fiscal impact on other local governments. It cannot determine the district’s fiscal effects because future borrowing and charges are unknown. Its reference to possible eminent-domain activity describes the proposal’s contingency, not authority that survived the final vote. The note does not estimate a particular owner’s future tax bill. Fiscal note; Final law, section 4.
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.