BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 3772 |
By: Nevárez |
Ways & Means |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Certain municipalities, interested parties note, are currently authorized to issue a municipal hotel occupancy tax for the promotion of tourism, among other uses. Recent legislation allowed the use of municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue to enhance and upgrade sports facilities in certain municipalities to increase tourism. According to the parties, certain municipalities are having difficulties securing loans for sports complex projects because of existing requirements relating to the allocation of the tax revenue. C.S.H.B. 3772 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. 3772 amends the Tax Code to remove a municipality that has a population of at least 7,500 and is located in a county that borders the Pecos River and that has a population of not more than 15,000 from the municipalities authorized to use municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue for the promotion of tourism by the enhancement and upgrading of existing sports facilities or fields provided the municipalities own the facilities or fields. The bill removes as an authorized use of such tax revenue by a certain municipality the construction of a recreational venue in the immediate vicinity of area hotels.
C.S.H.B. 3772 includes among the authorized uses of municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue by certain municipalities the construction, enlarging, equipping, improvement, maintenance, repairing, and operation of an arena used for rodeos, livestock shows, and agricultural expositions to substantially enhance hotel activity and encourage tourism and removes as an authorized use a business recruitment project to substantially enhance hotel activity and encourage tourism. The bill includes among such municipalities a municipality with a population of at least 7,500 that is located in a county that borders the Pecos River and that has a population of not more than 15,000; a municipality with a population of not more than 5,000 that is located in a county through which the Frio River flows and an interstate highway crosses, and that has a population of at least 15,000; and a municipality with a population of not less than 7,500 that is located in a county with a population of not less than 40,000 but less than 250,000 that is adjacent to a county with a population of less than 750.
C.S.H.B. 3772 prohibits an applicable municipality from using municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue to construct or expand a recreational facility or an arena used for rodeos, livestock shows, and agricultural expositions in an amount that would exceed the amount of hotel revenue in the area that is likely to be reasonably attributable to events held at that facility or arena during the 15-year period beginning on the date the construction or expansion is completed. The bill requires an independent analyst or consultant hired by the municipality to make this required projection. The bill requires a municipality that uses municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue for the construction, enlarging, equipping, improvement, maintenance, repairing, or operation of such a facility to annually prepare a report that describes the events held during the preceding year at each facility that received municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue from the municipality during that year and the number of hotel room nights, hotel revenue, and municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue attributable to those events.
|
||||||||||||
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. 3772 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.
|
||||||||||||
|