TexasCHLforum.com

Possible confusion from Star Telegram article we discussed here: viewtopic.php?t=87067

But as I noted in that thread:

"After review, the OAG determines the 30.06 signs at issue were posted by the association, which possesses the exclusive right to post signage on the zoo premises under the terms of its fee-for-services management contract with the city. Further, a reviewing court would likely conclude that under existing law, a private non-profit corporation such as the association is not considered a political subdivision of the state for purposes of section 411.209(a) of the Government Code. Accordingly, the OAG finds signage posted at the entrance to the zoo is not in violation of section 411.209 of the Government Code. The OAG is closing these complaints."

The letter also referenced the OAG's earlier Opinion KP-0108 which the OAG also believes a license holder would be excepted from 30.06 and 30.07 posting at such property:

A court would likely conclude that a license holder who carries a handgun on property that is owned by a governmental entity but leased to a private entity and that is not a premises or other place from which the license holder is prohibited from carrying a handgun under sections 46.03 or 46.035 of the Penal Code is excepted from the offenses in subsections 30.06(a) and 30.07(a) of the Penal Code.