BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 1964 |
By: Clardy |
Ways & Means |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The Fredonia Hotel in Nacogdoches has played an enormous part in the economic development of what certain parties allege is the oldest town in Texas. However, the hotel recently closed and the city has been searching for an interested investor to purchase and operate the Fredonia. An investor has expressed interest in purchasing and renovating the hotel but is seeking additional funds beyond the investment that the interested buyer is prepared to make before agreeing to undertake the project. To address the prospective investor's concerns and promote the project, the city has agreed to use the hotel occupancy taxes it would collect on the Fredonia to help renovate and operate the hotel. C.S.H.B. 1964 seeks to address this issue.
|
||||||
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
|
||||||
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
|
||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 1964 amends the Tax Code to designate a municipality with a population of less than 50,000 that contains a general academic teaching institution that is not a component institution of a university system as an eligible central municipality for purposes of the municipal hotel occupancy tax. The bill specifies that the terms "convention center facilities" or "convention center complex," for purposes of the municipal hotel occupancy tax, include a hotel that is owned in part by such a municipality and that is located within 1,000 feet of a convention center facility.
|
||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2015.
|
||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 1964 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and formatted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||
|