Latest news with #SenateBill15
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Louisiana lawmakers vote to toughen immigration enforcement
BATON ROUGE, La. (LSU Manship School News Service) — Lawmakers passed two bills this week aimed at expanding the state's role in immigration enforcement, joining states like Texas and Florida in helping the Trump administration crack down on undocumented immigrants. One bill would require agencies to track the legal status of people using public services, and the other would criminalize interference with federal immigration operations. The Legislature last year empowered local and state law-enforcement to arrest people on suspicion that they were undocumented immigrants. Gov. Jeff Landry signed that bill into law, and the two bills passed this week will now go to him for his signature. The latest legislation comes amid growing national tensions over immigration policy. Protests broke out in Los Angeles this week in response to enforcement actions, and Trump hinted at invoking the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that might let the president deploy the military domestically. One of the new bills, Senate Bill 100, by Sen. Blake Miguez, R-New Iberia, would mandate that state departments–including Health, Education, Motor Vehicles and others–disclose whether individuals receiving services are 'illegal aliens' or 'unaccompanied alien children.' Services covered under the bill range from healthcare and education to tax benefits and emergency assistance. Agencies would have to report how many people in those categories they serve and the cost of those services. The reports would be submitted annually to the governor, the attorney general and the Legislature and published online. The bill also would require agencies to verify legal status, either through immigration documents or by using federal tools like the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements system. Agencies that do not comply risk funding loss. Senate Bill 15 by Sen. Jay Morris, R-West Monroe, would prohibit private individuals and public officials from obstructing federal immigration enforcement or civil immigration proceedings. That would include refusing to cooperate with requests from agencies like the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, or failing to honor written detainer requests when releasing someone suspected of being in the country illegally. The bill updates the state's obstruction and malfeasance laws to cover immigration-related violations. Penalties range from six months in jail and a $1,000 fine to one year in jail and a $5,000 fine. More serious violations involving public officials could lead to felony charges and prison sentences of up to 10 years. The law would take effect Aug. 1. If SB15 is enacted, Louisiana would be the first state to institute state criminal penalties for interfering with immigration enforcement efforts. Under current law, these issues are handled as a civil matter. Both measures reflect Gov. Jeff Landry's broader agenda to position Louisiana as a more active player in immigration enforcement, which echoes moves in the other Republican-led states. Advocates against the legislation highlighted the negative impact the bills would have on immigrant families in the state. Tia Fields, policy manager at the Baton Rouge-based Louisiana Organization for Refugees and Immigrants, told the Louisiana Illuminator that the bills convey a 'chilling message' and portray immigrant families as expendable. Proposal to ban DEI college courses, state policy dies in Louisiana Legislature McKinley High School moves to temporary location as campus undergoes renovation Students urged to seek aid now as FAFSA deadline nears Kevin Durant's former townhome up for sale, listing price $35 Bonnaroo co-founder dies days before 2025 festival Man gored by bison at Yellowstone National Park, second incident this year Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
In final days of session, legislature advances Landry immigration agenda
Officers with Louisiana State Police and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement escort a man arrested March 13, 2025, at the Port of Lake Charles. ICE reported 11 arrests of people working at the port who did not have legal status to be in the United States (Photo courtesy of ICE). Two controversial state bills in the Louisiana Legislature — both designed to aid federal and state crackdowns on immigration — are in the final stages of becoming law after passing overwhelmingly in the state House of Representatives Monday. With days to go in the spring legislative session, Louisiana's House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly in favor of Senate Bill 100, which requires agencies to track undocumented immigrants who receive state services, and Senate Bill 15, which makes it a crime for law enforcement agents, and others, to refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement agencies. The session is set to adjourn on Thursday. The bills both advance the priorities of Gov. Jeff Landry, a conservative immigration hardliner and ally of President Donald Trump. Senate Bill 100, sponsored by Sen. Blake Miguez, R-New Iberia, which requires service providing public agencies – including the state Department of Education, Department of Corrections and the Department of Children & Family Services – to collect data and report to the State on the immigration status of people who receive those services. It passed 74-27 Monday afternoon. Senate Bill 15, sponsored by Sen. Jay Morris, R-West Monroe, criminalizes the failure of local officials – including sheriffs and other law enforcement officers – to cooperate with federal immigration agencies, with penalties of up to 10 years in prison. It also criminalizes acts by everyday Louisiana residents deemed to obstruct or 'thwart' federal immigration enforcement efforts. It passed 71-30. If Senate Bill 15 becomes law, it would directly conflict with immigration policies adopted by the Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office and, potentially, the New Orleans Police Department, both of which are under federal orders to limit their cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal immigration agencies. Both have already passed the Senate. SB100 will now head back to the Senate for Senate President Cameron Henry's signature and then to Landry's desk for his signature. Senate Bill 15, however, was amended in the House before final passage. The Senate will have to vote to approve the amended version before it can move on to become law. Advocates against the pieces of legislation say the bills, once effected, will push Louisiana's immigrant community into the shadows. 'With the passage of SB 100 and SB 15, our state has sent a chilling message: that Immigrant families and anyone seeking safety or services are seen as expendable.' said Tia Fields, who manages policy for advocacy group Louisianan Organization for Refugees and Immigrants in Baton Rouge. 'Let's be clear: these bills aren't about public safety. They're about punishment.' If enacted, Senate Bill 15 will be the first state law in the U.S. that criminalizes interference with immigration enforcement efforts, considered to be civil matters, or refusals to cooperate with federal immigration agencies. During debate on the House Floor on Monday Rep. Candace Newell, D-New Orleans, repeatedly asked how the Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office would follow the law, which directly contradicts an agency policy that was created under federal court order. The bill requires jailers, including sheriffs, to honor administrative requests from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, to hold an immigrant beyond their release date from jail so that they can be brought into ICE custody. But a Sheriff's Office policy prohibits the agency from honoring hold requests except in cases where a jail detainee is accused of a particularly serious crime. The policy exists as the result of a 2013 federal court settlement stemming from a 2011 civil rights case in which two men said they were illegally held in the city's jail for months at the request of ICE. Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, another immigration hardliner, is challenging that settlement agreement. Louisiana already has a law, Act 314 of 2024 – enacted through Senate Bill 208, sponsored by Miguez and passed last year – that blocks local law enforcement agencies from adopting so-called 'sanctuary' like the one at the Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office. But unlike Senate Bill 15 — which calls for prison sentences of up to 10 years — that is a civil law, carrying no jail time for failure to comply. 'The Orleans Parish Sheriff, who should be trying to get out from under the handcuffs of the consent decree, [is] using that as a shield to avoid the possible implications of refusing to cooperate with ICE,' Morris told committee members. Will Harrell, senior program monitor for the Sheriff's Office said while he's disappointed that the bill passed, he is 'not surprised with the outcome, given the anti-immigrant climate.' He said he's concerned about how Orleans Parish Sheriff, Susan Hutson, will follow both the state law and the federal court order 'The sheriff does not intend to be a breaker of laws,' Harrell said. 'It's just a question of which law we need to follow.' Senate Bill 100 mirrors a 2024 executive order from Landry, signed in the early days of his governorship, that requires state departments and their sub-agencies to calculate and report on the amount of money that undocumented immigrants are costing the state. According to Rep. Michael Johnson, R-Pineville — who brought the bill to the House floor — Landry and Murrill requested SB15 be crafted to codify the language in that executive order. Undocumented immigrants are already shut out of some state-administered services. They are ineligible for food stamp benefits or Medicaid, for example, and they can't get drivers' licenses. But they attend schools, get medical treatment at public hospitals and use emergency shelters, among other things. Advocates against the bill said recording identifying information like citizenship or immigration status, will not only affect undocumented immigrants, but also people who may not trust their government for other reasons, making it less likely that they seek out essential services like medical care. 'Not all of these services require any kind of identification right now, [like] the low barrier homeless shelters or food banks or things like that, and there are people who are going to be unwilling to get benefits if it requires of citizenship verification,' Sissy Phleger, a safety net analyst for state think tank Invest in Louisiana, said in a phone interview last week. 'It is going to burden people in Louisiana who don't have enough to eat. I don't have a place to live and that seems cruel and unnecessary.' During discussions over the bill on the House floor, Democratic Caucus chairperson Rep. Matthew Willard, D-New Orleans, expressed concern over the proposed penalties in the bill: the withholding of funding to agencies that do not comply. 'For me it seems kind of like a threat,' Willard said. Johnson called the penalty an 'incentive' to follow the law. 'This is just transparency,' Johnson said. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE This article first appeared on Verite News New Orleans and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Starter Homes Live in Texas, Die in Arizona
Happy Tuesday, and welcome to another edition of Rent Free. This week's stories include: A win for starter homes in Texas… …and a defeat for them in Arizona A new constitutional challenge to affordable housing fees in Denver A veto of a rent-recommendation algorithm ban in Colorado After suffering a near-death experience last week, Texas' Senate Bill 15, a.k.a. the Texas Starter Homes Act, has passed the Legislature and now goes to Gov. Greg Abbott's desk. The bill would prevent larger cities in larger counties from requiring that homes sit on lots larger than 3,000 square feet in new subdivisions of at least five acres. Proponents argue the bill will enable the construction of more inherently affordable owner-occupied housing in cities that currently require much larger minimum lot sizes. "Texas is the first state to take seriously the idea that a basic starter home, without any subsidy, is usually affordable to people making average or below average incomes, [and] should be available throughout the state," says Salim Furth, a researcher at George Mason University's Mercatus Center. Minimum lot size bills have been one of the more controversial and less successful YIMBY reforms in state legislatures. Texas' bill is one of the first to make it over the finish line. The initial version of S.B. 15 would have capped minimum lot sizes at 1,400 square feet, which mirrors unzoned Houston's minimum lot sizes. That version passed the Senate back in March but was watered down in negotiations between the House and Senate during last-minute considerations of the bill. The legislation survived an effort by Texas House Democrats to effectively gut the legislation. Rep. Ramon Romero Jr. (D–Fort Worth) briefly succeeded in amending the bill to only require that cities create a starter home zoning district with the smaller minimum lot sizes. The amendment would not have required cities to actually apply this new zoning district to existing land or to new subdivisions. This would have effectively made S.B. 15 a voluntary paperwork exercise. Romero, who also briefly managed to kill S.B. 15 via a procedural move in the House earlier in May, has criticized the idea that allowing smaller homes on smaller lots would yield more affordable homes. "It's already been proven that just because you have smaller (homes) does not immediately equate to more affordable (homes)," he said to The Texas Tribune last month. (One study of minimum lot size reductions in Houston, Texas, facilitated an "unprecedented" increase in the rates of infill housing construction in single-family neighborhoods.) That gutting amendment was stripped out of the bill in last-minute negotiations between the House and the Senate, meaning that S.B. 15 will have some teeth, provided that Abbott signs it into law. While the bill does not apply to existing residential areas, Furth says it will provide developers a lot more flexibility when constructing new subdivisions, where most new housing in Texas is being built. "Most single-family home production in Texas is done in non-residential or extremely large lots. A normal Texas subdivision is going to be five-plus acres, and maybe 100 acres," he tells Reason. "This will allow [builders] to include small homes in that mix and make sure there's a variety of price points and variety of styles." Meanwhile, in Arizona, a near-identical Starter Home Act is effectively dead in the Legislature. Similar to Texas' S.B. 15, Arizona's S.B. 1229 initially would have prevented cities from requiring homes in new five-acre-plus subdivisions to sit on lots of 1,500 square feet or more. It also would have prohibited cities from dictating home designs and aesthetic features. As in Texas, the bill was amended to raise its minimum lot size cap to 3,000 square feet. That helped get the legislation out of the Senate on a 16–13 vote, with Republicans and Democrats on each side of the vote. Two House committees also approved the bill in March and early April. But it then stalled over what proponents say was persistent opposition from the Arizona League of Cities and Towns and Gov. Katie Hobbs' office. Hobbs vetoed a very similar starter homes bill last year, citing concerns that that bill didn't explicitly carve out areas near military bases or explicitly include fire safety standards. The governor's concerns were incorporated into S.B. 1229. Yet the League, a taxpayer-funded association that lobbies on behalf of local governments, still opposed the measure's limits on local land use regulation. The League had pushed for amendments to S.B. 1229 that would have dramatically limited its scope by imposing price and income limits on new starter homes and requiring that buyers live in the homes for 15 years. These demands were a nonstarter with proponents of S.B. 1229, and negotiations on a compromise measure broke down earlier this spring. "Our last meeting was about an hour and a half in the governor's office. I could tell [the governor's staff] were not going to come over to our side at all. They were literally letting the League [of Cities and Towns] run the table," Sen. Shawna Bolick (R–Phoenix) tells Reason. With the threat of Hobbs' veto hanging over S.B. 1229, the bill was never brought up for a floor vote. Despite the failure of the starter homes bill, Arizona did pass a handful of other housing reforms. That includes House Bill 2928, which expands last year's statewide legalization of accessory dwelling units in cities to unincorporated county land as well. The state also passed a bill allowing for third-party plan reviews of single-family projects. A homebuilder in Denver is suing the city over what it says are unconstitutional affordable housing fees being slapped on two of its pending residential projects. Denver's Linkage Fee ordinance requires residential projects of 10 units or less to either set aside units to be rented or sold at below-market rates or pay per-square-foot "linkage" fees. When local builder redT Homes sought approval for two projects, a four-unit single-family home development and a two-duplex project, the city said it would need to pay linkage fees of $45,000 and $25,000 on each respective project. A string of U.S. Supreme Court decisions has established that the Fifth Amendment protects property owners from having to turn over money or property when applying for a development permit, unless there's some nexus between those exactions and the actual impact caused by the permitted project. Denver claimed when passing its linkage fee ordinance in 2016 that new development raises economic activity and, therefore, raises demand for work-force housing. redT counters that its planned homes are making housing more affordable, not less, by expanding overall housing supply. By charging it an affordable linkage fee anyway, Denver is charging it for an impact it's not having. That, it argues, violates the Fifth Amendment's protections against "unconstitutional conditions." redT Homes is suing Denver in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. "These affordable housing fees almost by definition fail" the Supreme Court's test for unconstitutional conditions, says David Deerson, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, which is representing redT Homes. "A fundamental law of economics is that an increase in supply tends to lower prices. Denver can't force developers like redT Homes to pay fees to solve problems that not only are they not creating, they're already solving," he says. A favorable federal court ruling for redT Homes could have major implications for housing development nationwide. Like Denver, hundreds of jurisdictions have adopted similar "inclusionary zoning" policies that require housing developers to include below-market-rate units in their projects or pay in-lieu affordable housing fees. And like Denver's linkage fees, a similar constitutional argument can be made that inclusionary zoning's affordable housing mandates take developers' property to mitigate an impact they're not having. Developers and property rights advocates have periodically challenged inclusionary zoning laws in court, typically with little success. In 2019, the Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to Marin County, California's inclusionary zoning policy that the California Supreme Court had upheld. (The Pacific Legal Foundation also litigated that case.) The Supreme Court's 2024 decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado established that fees and permit conditions imposed on whole classes of projects by legislatures must still have some connection to those projects' impacts. The Sheetz decision was a narrow one. It didn't directly deal with inclusionary zoning. But it did widen the universe of permit conditions that can be challenged as "unconstitutional conditions." Potentially, a new inclusionary zoning case with a new set of facts might pick up this Court's interest and result in a decision that puts some guardrails on affordable housing mandates and fees. On pure policy grounds, inclusionary zoning acts as a tax on development, reducing production and raising costs. Ending these policies could unlock a lot of potential new projects. Colorado Gov. Jared Polis has vetoed a bill that would have banned the use of rent-recommendation software. Proponents of the bill argue that this software facilitates price-fixing among landlords by sharing nonpublic data on prices and vacancies between competitors. Colorado, along with a number of other states and the U.S. Department of Justice, is currently suing rent-recommendation software provider RealPage for antitrust violations. Polis said in a veto letter, posted online by Colorado Public Radio, that while he shares concerns that this software could be used to drive up prices, the measure was overly broad. "We should not inadvertently take a tool off the table that could identify vacancies and provide consumers with meaningful data to help efficiently manage residential real estate to ensure people can access housing," said the governor in his veto letter. "This bill may have unintended consequences of creating a hostile environment for providers of rental housing and could result in further diminished supply of rental housing based on inadequate data," he wrote. The governor said he would prefer for state and federal lawsuits to play out. He said he'd be open to a future bill that made a distinction between collusive and noncollusive uses of nonpublic competitor data. Read Reason's past coverage of the RealPage controversy here. New York City's rent-stabilized housing stock is in increasing financial distress, thanks to rising operating costs and the city's suppression of rent increases. To remedy the situation, New York assembly member, and New York City mayoral candidate, Zohran Mamdani is proposing to remedy the situation by freezing rents. Los Angeles Times covers the California Legislature's efforts to exclude urban infill housing from the state's notoriously burdensome environmental review process. Organized labor is cool on the effort, altruistically asking, "What's in it for us?" The biggest opponents of a public housing redevelopment project in New York City? The [wrong link here] of multimillion-dollar homes nearby. The Connecticut Legislature has passed a major housing bill that requires localities to zone for more affordable housing, increases density near transit stops, and pares back minimum parking requirements. The post Starter Homes Live in Texas, Die in Arizona appeared first on
Yahoo
01-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Texas lawmakers to allow smaller homes on smaller lots
Texas lawmakers have sent a scaled-back zoning proposal to allow smaller homes on smaller lots to Gov. Greg Abbott's desk — a bid to put a dent in the state's high home prices. Lawmakers in the Texas House and Senate passed Senate Bill 15 this weekend after the proposal to give builders the flexibility to build smaller houses in the state's largest cities kicked up heat from House Democrats, who repeatedly tried to kill the bill. The Senate approved the bill by a unanimous vote Saturday. The bill was more controversial in the House, where lawmakers endorsed the latest version by a slimmer 78-57 vote Sunday. The bill found bipartisan support in the House, where a majority of Democrats and Republicans voted in favor. 'These are homes your employees, your kids and grandkids can afford,' said state Rep. Gary Gates, a Richmond Republican who carried the bill in the House. SB 15's passage caps off a session in which lawmakers passed an array of bills intended to tackle the state's high housing costs, primarily by cutting local regulations and red tape in order to allow more homes to be built. Texas needs hundreds of thousands more homes than it has, according to one estimate. That shortage, housing advocates and experts have argued, played a key role in driving up Texas home prices and rents as the state boomed. This year, state lawmakers sought to mitigate that shortage with a package of bills that would supersede local zoning ordinances and reduce other hurdles to building homes. Among the most far-reaching proposals they sent to Abbott would make it harder for residents to stop new homes from being built and allow apartments and mixed-use developments in more places, like retail and commercial corridors, in the state's largest cities. SB 15, a top priority of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who runs the Senate, aims to force the state's biggest cities to allow smaller homes on smaller lots in some places. Doing so gives homebuilders more latitude when it comes to the size of homes they're allowed to build. Homes on smaller lots have generally been found to be less expensive than homes on bigger ones, research has shown. The bill bars major cities from requiring homes in new subdivisions to sit on more than 3,000 square feet. That's down from 1,400 square feet, which the Senate initially pitched. The state's biggest cities often require single-family homes to sit on around 5,000 to 7,500 square feet of land, a Texas Tribune analysis found. SB 15 doesn't touch existing neighborhoods, and only would apply in new subdivisions with at least five acres of land. If Abbott signs it, the bill would only apply to cities with at least 150,000 residents in counties with a population of 300,000 or more. Some 19 of the state's largest cities fit that criterion, per a Tribune analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data. It also wouldn't apply in cases in which homeowners association and restrictive covenants prevent smaller lot sizes. The proposal spurred a lot of drama in the last days of the legislative session. The idea of the state telling cities what kinds of homes they can allow didn't sit well with a contingent of House Democrats, who tried repeatedly to kill the bill on procedural grounds or gut it. They and some Republicans argued local residents wouldn't get a chance to weigh in on new development resulting from the bill if it passed. 'Leave it up to the cities that know what's best for their city,' state Rep. Ramon Romero, D-Worth, said. Romero successfully amended the bill on the House floor last week so the bill would only apply if cities adopted a new zoning category that allowed homes to the smaller lot size outlined in the bill. That provision would have effectively rendered the bill useless, the bill's proponents argued. House and Senate lawmakers ripped that amendment out of the bill in negotiations between the two chambers. House Democrats had railed against the bill — taking seemingly contradictory approaches. Romero argued that homes built on smaller lots wouldn't necessarily be cheaper. Meanwhile, state Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins, D-San Antonio, questioned Gates last week about whether the bill would create 'future ghettos.' Some Republicans, too, objected. State Rep. Tony Tinderholt, an Arlington Republican considered one of the House's most conservative members, argued the bill would eventually lead to higher crime in places that saw homes on smaller lots. Other bills lawmakers sent to Abbott aimed to make it easier to convert vacant office buildings into residences and would force cities to allow manufactured homes. They also relaxed local rules in college towns that say how many unrelated adults can live in a home. Other ideas to allow more homes died quietly this session. A proposal to make it easier to build additional dwelling units in the backyards of single-family homes, which died in the House two years ago, missed a key deadline last week and died before it could come up for a vote. Another idea to allow houses of worship to build homes on their land never made it to the House or Senate floor. First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Texas House revives zoning reform bill to lower minimum lot sizes
AUSTIN (Nexstar) — Senate Bill 15 — which prevents larger cities from imposing minimum residential lot sizes of 3,000 square feet or larger — appeared to be dead on Sunday. State Rep. Ramon Romero Jr., D-Fort Worth, had called a point of order on the bill, claiming a population bracket improperly restricted a political subdivision. He was correct. 'The bill as reported from committee exempted from its application a location that is, among other things, within 'one mile of a campus of the perimeter of a law enforcement training center in a county that has a population of 2,600,000 or more but less than 2,700,000,' the House journal from Sunday reads. 'The chair notes that the rule permits the use of minimum or maximum population in a bill to limit its application, but not both. Here, the bracket includes only Dallas County. The chair would be required to find a reasonable relationship between the location of a law enforcement training center in Dallas County and the bill's purpose of increasing the housing supply…The chair can find no such relationship.' When a point of order is sustained, the bill must go back to committee to fix the error before going back through the process to reach the House floor. That presented a problem for SB 15, as the bill had to be voted on by Tuesday at midnight, and the bills to be brought up on deadline day had to be cemented on Sunday night. Quickly, legislators got to work to fix the bill in time. At 2:50 p.m., SB 15 was sent back to committee, and by 6:52 p.m. it was in the hands of the calendars committee, who controls the docket of bills for each day. The calendars committee earmarked SB 15 for Tuesday's major state calendar that night, pushing it to the top of docket. Another lawmaker tried to get the bill killed again, saying it was expedited improperly. 'I respectfully raise a point-of-order against further consideration of Senate Bill 15 on the grounds the bill was improperly placed on the major state calendar,' State Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins, D-San Antonio, said. Items placed on the major state calendar must be of importance to the entire state. Gervin-Hawkins argued this bill shouldn't qualify, because it's application is limited to municipalities with over 150,000 people. After a lengthy delay, her point of order was overruled. 'The bill is a major reform of state land use law and will have major implications for housing and economic activity throughout the state,' State Rep. Brooks Landgraf, R-Odessa, said as he presided over the Speaker's desk. 'Additionally, rule 6, section 25, gives the committee on calendars wide discretion over which calendar it will place a bill on. The point of order is respectfully overruled.' After a pair of amendments, the bill passed a third reading with a 87-48 vote. SB 15 aims to reduce housing prices by improving housing availability. Austin recently changed their minimum lot size for single-family homes from 5,750 square feet to 1,800 square feet. Houston changed their to 1,400 square feet for certain residences within the city center in 1998, expanding it to the whole city in 2013. A Pew study claims this allowed single-family homes to be replaced with townhouses, opening up more affordable housing options. 'We're looking down a very bleak future [if we don't take action],' Nicole Nosek, founder of Texans for Reasonable Solutions, said. 'We're looking at a situation where not only are we not going to be able to have our kids and our grandkids live in the same city that they grew up in, but on top of that — all this flourishing economic activity that we're seeing move to Texas, we jeopardize that by not allowing the middle class to own a piece of the American dream of home ownership.' SB 15 aims to mandate the changes Austin and Houston voluntarily went through. The bill prevents a municipality with over 150,000 people from imposing a minimum lot size less than 3,000 square feet (changed from 1,500 square feet with a floor amendment). While the idea sailed through both the Senate and House committees unanimously, and passed the Senate floor 29-2, there was pushback in the House, particularly from those representing the Dallas-Fort-Worth area. 'I don't want to take away the ability for my city and the people of my city to be able to control the size of the lots and the homes that are put there,' State Rep. Tony Tinderholt, R-Arlington, said. 'I own a security company, and I'll tell you that these high-density locations cost hundred of thousands and sometimes a couple million of dollars a year to secure after they've been there 10-20 years because they become crime-ridden.' The opposition was bipartisan. 'Do you believe that residents should be silenced when it comes to your law that is affecting someone's neighborhood? When they bought their home, they moved into a single-family residential area,' Romero said. 'You don't believe that people should have their voice heard?' SB 15 will be heard for a third reading on Wednesday. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
