HB 1144 changesTourism improvement districts.

What changed

+417 / −260 words · LargeConfidence: high

This bill fundamentally restructures tourism improvement districts by adding broad residential property exemptions and strengthening consent requirements. The legislation removes previous liability and bondholder protection provisions while exempting all homestead properties, single-family homes, and multi-unit residential housing from district inclusion and special assessments. These exempted properties also cannot count toward petition signature requirements. The bill transforms the approval threshold from an either-or test to a conjunctive requirement: now at least 50% of business owners must sign the petition AND those signers must represent over 50% of projected assessment revenue. Additionally, the legislation creates a new individual opt-out mechanism allowing non-signing business owners to request exclusion from the district, which the legislative body must approve or deny before final passage.

Change log

• SECTION 1 > (5)

  addedhigh confidence

  New opt-out provision allows non-signing business owners to request exclusion from tourism districts

  This section creates a new requirement for legislative bodies to determine whether individual business owners who did not sign the petition but would be subject to the district's assessment wish to request exclusion from the district. The legislative body must approve or deny such exclusion requests before final passage of the ordinance establishing the tourism improvement district. This provision applies even when the district has otherwise reached the approval threshold.

• SECTION 1 > (9)

  modifiedhigh confidence

  New section 9.5 inserted to exclude certain property owners from district territory and petition signature counts

  The bill inserts a new section 9.5 that establishes categories of property owners who may not be included within a tourism improvement district's territory. These excluded property owners also shall not count toward meeting the petition signature requirements under section 13. The previous section 10 addressing district territory is renumbered as section 9.5 with substantially revised content.

• SECTION 1 > (c)

  removedhigh confidence

  Liability limitation and bond protection provisions for tourism improvement districts deleted

  The bill removes two provisions governing tourism improvement districts. The first clarified that district liabilities are not obligations of the governmental unit and must be paid solely from special assessments and district revenues. The second protected bondholder interests by prohibiting reductions or terminations of special assessments when such actions would interfere with debt retirement. Both provisions are entirely eliminated from the statute.

• SECTION 1 > (2)

  addedhigh confidence

  Single family residential housing explicitly excluded from tourism improvement districts

  This section adds a new exclusion for property used for single family residential housing from tourism improvement districts. The exclusion is absolute, applying to any such property. This creates a clear carve-out protecting single family residential properties from tourism improvement district assessments or requirements.

• SECTION 1 > (3)

  addedmedium confidence

  New criterion added requiring evaluation of special benefit assessment formula appropriateness

  This section adds a new criterion (3) that must be considered, requiring determination of whether the formula or method used for assessing special benefits is appropriate. This appears to be a new evaluation standard being inserted into a list of criteria, though without the surrounding context it's unclear what process or entity must make this determination.

• SECTION 1 > (1)

  addedhigh confidence

  New requirement: at least 50% of business owners must support proposed tourism improvement district

  This section adds a threshold requiring that at least fifty percent of business owners within a proposed district support its creation. This appears to be part of a consent or approval mechanism for establishing tourism improvement districts. The provision sets a minimum participation standard before a district can be formed.

• APPENDIX

  addedhigh confidence

  Committee amendments add homestead and residential property exclusions and individual opt-out provisions

  The committee report proposes amendments to exempt homestead and residential properties (single-family and multi-unit) from tourism improvement districts and their special assessments. These properties would not count toward petition signature requirements. The amendments also add a new requirement allowing individual business owners who did not sign the petition to request exclusion from the district before the legislative body makes its final decision. The committee voted 11-0 to recommend passage with these amendments.

• PREAMBLE

  modifiedhigh confidence

  Petition approval changed from majority-or-revenue test to majority-and-revenue test; individual exclusion hearing right added

  The bill digest now requires both conditions for district approval rather than either: at least 50% of business owners must sign the petition AND those signers must represent over 50% of projected assessment revenue. Previously only one condition needed to be met. The digest also adds a new requirement that the legislative body must hear from each individual business owner wishing to request exclusion from the district at the public hearing. The citations affected have been broadened from a specific subsection (IC 36-7-42.5) to the entire chapter (IC 36-7).

• PREAMBLE >cont.

  modifiedhigh confidence

  Preamble adds exclusions for residential properties from tourism improvement districts

  The bill's introductory section now specifies that three categories of property are excluded from inclusion within tourism improvement districts: property receiving a homestead standard deduction, property used for single family residential housing, and property used for multi-unit residential housing. The preamble also updates administrative details including the legislative session designation (changed from unspecified to Second Regular Session of the 124th General Assembly, 2026) and adds a filing reference number.

• SECTION 1 > (3)

  modifiedhigh confidence

  Multi-unit residential property exempted from tourism district special assessments

  This section replaces language about assessment formula appropriateness with a new exemption for multi-unit residential housing from special assessments under the tourism improvement district chapter. The change also introduces new section numbering (Sec. 10) and adds a reference to section 9.5 regarding the territory of tourism improvement districts. The substantive effect is to carve out multi-unit residential properties from the special assessment mechanism.

• SECTION 1 > (1)

  modifiedhigh confidence

  Business owner approval threshold replaced with homestead property exclusion

  This section previously required approval from at least fifty percent of business owners within a proposed tourism improvement district. The new text instead exempts any property receiving a homestead standard deduction under IC 6-1.1-12-37 from the district. This fundamentally changes the provision from an approval requirement to a property exclusion based on homestead status.

• SECTION 1 > (4)

  modifiedhigh confidence

  Technical/conforming change

  This change removes the transitional language that began Section 13 and replaces the period at the end of subsection (4) with a semicolon followed by 'and'. This is a structural modification that transforms what was previously a terminal sentence into a non-terminal list item, indicating that additional enumerated items now follow. The substantive content regarding whether the district contains territory specially benefited by activities and improvements remains unchanged.

• SECTION 1 > (2)

  modifiedhigh confidence

  District map requirements made subject to section 9.5

  The requirement for a map and boundary description of a proposed tourism improvement district is now explicitly made subject to section 9.5 of this chapter. Previously, the map requirement stood alone without reference to any other section. This cross-reference suggests that section 9.5 may provide additional conditions, exceptions, or procedures governing how district boundaries are defined or mapped.

• SECTION 1 > (7)

  modifiedhigh confidence

  District management association statement made subject to new section 9.5

  The requirement to provide a statement identifying the district management association, its board, governance structure, and proposed rules is now explicitly made subject to section 9.5 of this chapter. This cross-reference creates a dependency or limitation on how this identifying statement must be provided, though the content of section 9.5 is not shown in this excerpt.