AUSTIN — Banning transgender people from public bathrooms could cost the Texas economy $3.3 billion and 35,600 jobs, according to a study released Monday.

"These numbers tell us there will be a significant — and longstanding — adverse impact on San Antonio and the state. We urge our legislators to consider these effects in making their decisions," said Casandra Matej, president and CEO of Visit San Antonio, a tourism organization that opposes the measure and paid for the study conducted by the Perryman Group.

The study comes as a panel of Texas House lawmakers prepares to consider a revamped version of the bathroom bill championed by the Senate and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. The Senate bill would require transgender Texans to use the public restroom facilities that match their birth gender. The House bill, intended to be more business friendly, would prevent cities from adopting local laws that protect transgender Texans in bathrooms.

Proponents of the bathroom legislation argue it's needed to protect women and girls from predators in ladies' restrooms. Critics say the measure is discriminatory and could cost Texas businesses millions of dollars in lost opportunities. Already, nearly a dozen large meeting events have threatened to leave San Antonio because of the proposed legislation.

The Perryman Group, an economic research group based in Waco, estimates any type of bathroom-related legislation could damage tourism to the extent it would cost some 35,600 jobs. Bathroom regulations that are viewed as discriminatory could make the state less attractive to event planners and potential visitors, the study says. Over time, the study predicts the losses could mount to $5.5 billion annually and 59,600 jobs.

Before North Carolina revised its transgender bathroom ban, one analysis indicated the state would lose more than $3.75 billion over 12 years as a result of businesses and events abandoning the state in protest.

Steve Atkins, chairman of the San Antonio Tourism Council board, said the proposed bathroom legislation would make Texas an unfriendly state.

"It flies in the face of being a totally welcoming and gracious place for all people," Atkins said.

The Texas Association of Business released a similar study in December that lawmakers panned as inaccurate. It estimated Texas would take an economic hit as big as $8.5 billion if the bathroom bill passed.

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick accused the TAB of "fear mongering" and called the study by the largest business group in the state "bogus," a line he repeated Monday.

"The question that must be asked to the tourism council who put out this report is why they believe tourists will want to visit a place where any man can lurk and loiter in the ladies room?" he said in a prepared statement. "In North Carolina, where that is still not allowed by the state, last year, according to state data they set an all-time record for hotel occupancy and tourism."

Ray Perryman, lead economist with the Perryman Group, said he estimated Texas' losses conservatively after surveying convention planners and leisure travelers. He did not account for potential losses from international travel, business travel other than conventions, or any concerts or sporting events that might be cancelled.

"My goal was to provide a minimal level that could be anticipated based on a very conservative methodology," Perryman said.

Sen. Lois Kolkhorst, R-Brenham, author of the Senate's bathroom bill, said she was skeptical of the latest study, which was commissioned by a group that opposes the measure.

"The Texas Privacy Act simply provides clear direction to public schools and government institutions on how to protect privacy and safety by ensuring that men do not enter women's showers, locker rooms and restrooms," Kolkhorst said in an emailed statement.

Rep. Ron Simmons, R-Carrollton, author of the House bathroom bill, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the study. But he has said he expects his version of the bill to be more acceptable to business entities.

"The TPA affirms that Texas continues to be open for business while at the same time protecting Texans all across our great state," he told the The Dallas Morning News in a previous interview.