LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE 74th Regular Session May 11, 1995 TO: Honorable David Sibley, Chair IN RE: Committee Substitute Committee on Economic Development for Senate Senate Bill Austin, Texas No. 1696 By: Bivins FROM: John Keel, Director In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on Senate Bill No. 1696 (relating to the creation of development districts in certain counties; authorizing certain taxes) this office has determined the following: The bill would amend the Commissioners' Courts chapter of the Civil Statutes by adding an article which would authorize the creation of development districts in certain counties to provide incentives for the location and development of projects to attract visitors and tourists. Counties with a population of not more than 400,000 could create a county development district upon petition of the landowners in a county. The bill would specify the contents of the petition, including a description of the district boundaries. Creation of a district would be subject to voter approval. A district could issue bonds to pay all or part of the cost of any project authorized by the bill. The bonds would be payable from district funds, including taxes, license fees, grants, donations or other district revenues. Subject to voter approval, a district could levy a sales and use tax for the benefit of the district at a rate of up to one-half of one percent. The board by order could decrease or abolish the tax, or could call an election to increase, decrease or abolish the tax. The imposition of this tax would be governed by the County Sales Tax chapter of the Tax Code, except that certain sections would not apply. Additionally, a district sales tax would not count toward the limitation imposed by the County Sales Tax chapter on any sales tax levied by the county in which a district is located. A commissioners' court of a county with a population of less than 400,000 could impose a hotel occupancy tax at a rate not to exceed 7 percent of the price of a hotel room located within the boundaries of a district and not located within the corporate limits of a municipality. The bill would require a county to remit to a district any hotel occupancy taxes collected no later than the 10th day after the date the county receives the funds. The County Hotel Occupancy Tax chapter of the Tax Code would govern the imposition of this tax. As with the sales tax, certain sections would not apply. This tax would not count toward the limitation imposed by the County Hotel Occupancy Tax chapter on the hotel occupancy tax levied by the county in which a district is located. The provision of the bill specifying that the sales tax adopted by a district would not count toward the limitation imposed by Chapter 323 of the Tax Code appears to allow eligible counties to exceed the maximum combined local sales tax rate of 2 percent for city, county and other political subdivisions in the county provided under Section 323.101(d) of the Tax Code. No significant fiscal implication to the state is anticipated. The fiscal implication to units of local government cannot be estimated as the number of counties that would choose to create development districts cannot be determined. Source: Comptroller of Public Accounts LBB Staff: JK, SM, RR