Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve resolution to broaden uses of hotel-occupancy tax; county will seek state action
Summary
The court approved a resolution to amend chapters 351 and 352 of the Texas Tax Code (as referenced in the transcript) to broaden permitted uses of the hotel-occupancy tax (referred to in the meeting as 'hot tax') — keeping 25% for river cleanup while allowing broader use of the remaining 75% for tourism promotion — and authorized staff to forward the resolution to the county’s state representative for legislative action.
A presenter requested the court approve a resolution to amend chapters 351 and 352 of the Texas Tax Code (referred to in the meeting transcript) to align Uvalde County’s hotel-occupancy ("hot tax") language with the majority of Texas counties and the city’s current ordinance. The presenter said the change would not increase the 4% hotel-occupancy tax rate or alter collections; rather, it would broaden the allowable uses of the portion of proceeds so the county can use the 75% (while preserving the 25% set aside for river cleanup) for additional marketing and activities intended to attract overnight visitors.
Staff said the Texas Hotel Lodging Association had advised the change to permit more flexible use of funds and noted the regional tourism board had already approved the update at its level. The presenter asked the court to approve the local resolution so the county’s state representative could sponsor enabling legislation in the Texas Legislature.
Commissioner Bates moved to approve the resolution, the motion was seconded and, after brief clarification that the change does not change the tax rate, the court approved the resolution by voice vote. The action directs county staff to forward the approved resolution to the county’s state legislative representative for consideration in the state lawmaking process; it does not itself change state statute or the tax rate.
The court explicitly did not adopt a new tax; it approved a local resolution urging state-level code changes consistent with guidance from industry counsel and the regional tourism board.
