BILL ANALYSIS C.S.H.B. 2149 By: Tepper Land & Resource Management Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE In 2024, the City of Lubbock's Amortization & Strategic Downzoning Study Committee met to consider whether the city should incorporate amortization into its Unified Development Code. Although the Lubbock City Council ultimately decided against adopting amortization, according to reporting by KCBD News, the bill author has informed the committee that various municipalities use amortization, a process whereby a municipality changes the zoning in an area in which a legal and conforming business sits, which makes that business an illegal and nonconforming use, and then the municipality gives the business a certain time period to earn back, or "amortize," its investment in the property and either bring the property into compliance or cease operation by the end of the period. The 88th Texas Legislature enacted S.B. 929, which entitles a property owner or lessee who is required by a municipality to stop a nonconforming use to certain payment from the municipality to compensate for such stoppage or to continue the nonconforming use of the property until the owner or lessee recovers the applicable amount of the property's market value. C.S.H.B. 2149 seeks to strengthen private property rights by amending amortization and nonconforming land use procedures to prohibit a municipality from requiring a person to stop a nonconforming use of a property unless the person and municipality enter into an agreement regarding the stoppage and to provide for the resumption of a nonconforming use of a property within five years of the nonconforming use being changed or discontinued. CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution. ANALYSIS C.S.H.B. 2149 amends the Local Government Code to prohibit a municipality from requiring a person using a property in a manner considered to be a nonconforming use as a result of the adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary to stop the nonconforming use of the property unless the municipality enters into an agreement with the person. A person may continue the nonconforming use of the property unless the person enters into an agreement with the municipality, which must stipulate the amount of the payment to the person from the municipality to compensate for the costs incurred and the diminution in market value for stopping the nonconforming use of the property or stipulate the period during which the person may continue the nonconforming use of the property. C.S.H.B. 2149 entitles the owner or lessee of property who enters into an agreement with a municipality to stop the nonconforming use of the property to the same payments from the municipality or to the same continued nonconforming use of the property to which such an owner or lessee is entitled under current law if a municipality requires the owner or lessee to stop the nonconforming use. The bill changes the duration of that entitlement to continue the nonconforming use from until the owner or lessee recovers a certain amount from the municipality to a period, as determined by the owner or lessee, sufficient for the owner or lessee to recover the amount. For purposes of calculating the diminution in the property's market value to determine that payment amount, the bill changes the current market value that is used in the calculation from the current market value after the imposition of the requirement to stop the nonconforming use to the current market value after the municipality makes a determination that the municipality seeks to stop the nonconforming use. C.S.H.B. 2149 requires an agreement, in the event of a conflict in the choice of remedy by the applicable property owner or lessee, to incorporate the choice of remedy that controls. If an owner or lessee agrees to stop the nonconforming use, the owner or lessee and the municipality must enter into an agreement to stop the nonconforming use of the property in a timely manner after responding to the statutorily required written notice given by the municipality as provided by the bill's provisions. Accordingly, the bill clarifies that the notice, which currently references the requirement to stop the nonconforming use in general terms, must specifically state that the municipality seeks to stop the nonconforming use of the property and that the municipality is required to enter an agreement with the owner or lessee of the property for the purpose of stopping the nonconforming use and deciding which remedy the owner or lessee will choose. C.S.H.B. 2149 removes the authorization for a person who is entitled to a remedy and seeking payment from the municipality as the form of remedy to appeal the apportionment of the payment between each person if more than one person seeks such a payment from a municipality and requires a municipality instead to explicitly state the apportionment in an agreement entered into with a person to stop nonconforming land use. C.S.H.B. 2149 removes the authorization for a person who is entitled to a remedy and seeking to continue a nonconforming use as the form of remedy to appeal the municipality's or board of adjustment's decision continue to use the property in the same manner pending the appeal and authorizes a person seeking to continue a nonconforming land use to instead bring an action for declaratory relief, as authorized under the subsequently described bill provision, to continue to use the property in the same manner while the action is pending. C.S.H.B. 2149 authorizes a person using a property in a manner considered to be a nonconforming use as a result of the adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary who changes the use of the property to a conforming use or otherwise stops the nonconforming use of the property to resume the nonconforming use of the property if the person resumes such nonconforming use of the property before the fifth anniversary of the date the person changed or stopped the nonconforming use. This authorization expressly does not apply to a person who, pursuant to an agreement with the applicable municipality, changes or stops a nonconforming use of a property and receives a payment or continues the nonconforming use for a period of time. C.S.H.B. 2149 prohibits a municipality from prohibiting or restricting the following: the repair of a nonconforming structure; a person from continuing a nonconforming use of a property in accordance with general zoning regulations after the repair of a nonconforming structure or construction of a new building or structure to replace a damaged nonconforming structure; or modification or expansion of a nonconforming use of a property if the modification or expansion is necessary to continue the nonconforming use of the property or protect the health and safety of the property or occupants. C.S.H.B. 2149 authorizes a person to bring an action against a municipality for declaratory relief for a claimed violation of provisions that provide for the following: the requirement for a municipality to enter into an agreement with a person to stop nonconforming land use; the right to resume nonconforming land use; or the right to continue or modify nonconforming land use. The bill waives a municipality's immunity from suit and governmental immunity from liability for purposes of an action brought by a property owner or lessee under the bill's provisions. C.S.H.B. 2149 repeals Sections 211.019(j), (k), (m), (o), and (p), Local Government Code. C.S.H.B. 2149 applies to a property for which, on or after the bill's effective date, a municipality considers a proposed adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary under which a current conforming use of the property is a nonconforming use or receives a request to require a person to stop a nonconforming use of the property. A property for which a municipality considers a proposed adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary under which a current conforming use of the property is a nonconforming use or receives a request to require a person to stop a nonconforming use before the bill's effective date is governed by the law in effect immediately before the bill's effective date, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose. EFFECTIVE DATE September 1, 2025. COMPARISON OF INTRODUCED AND SUBSTITUTE While C.S.H.B. 2149 may differ from the introduced in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following summarizes the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill. Both the introduced and the substitute condition a municipality's authority to require a person using a property in a nonconforming manner to stop that nonconforming use on the municipality and the person entering into an agreement. However, the substitute prohibits the municipality from requiring the person to stop a nonconforming use of a property unless the municipality enters into an agreement with the person to stop the nonconforming use, whereas the introduced required the municipality to enter into an agreement with the person before the municipality may require the person to stop the nonconforming use. The substitute includes a provision absent from the introduced that changes the method for calculating the diminution in the property's market value for purposes of determining the payment amount from a municipality to a property owner or lessee.
BILL ANALYSIS
# BILL ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 2149
By: Tepper
Land & Resource Management
Committee Report (Substituted)
C.S.H.B. 2149
By: Tepper
Land & Resource Management
Committee Report (Substituted)
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE In 2024, the City of Lubbock's Amortization & Strategic Downzoning Study Committee met to consider whether the city should incorporate amortization into its Unified Development Code. Although the Lubbock City Council ultimately decided against adopting amortization, according to reporting by KCBD News, the bill author has informed the committee that various municipalities use amortization, a process whereby a municipality changes the zoning in an area in which a legal and conforming business sits, which makes that business an illegal and nonconforming use, and then the municipality gives the business a certain time period to earn back, or "amortize," its investment in the property and either bring the property into compliance or cease operation by the end of the period. The 88th Texas Legislature enacted S.B. 929, which entitles a property owner or lessee who is required by a municipality to stop a nonconforming use to certain payment from the municipality to compensate for such stoppage or to continue the nonconforming use of the property until the owner or lessee recovers the applicable amount of the property's market value. C.S.H.B. 2149 seeks to strengthen private property rights by amending amortization and nonconforming land use procedures to prohibit a municipality from requiring a person to stop a nonconforming use of a property unless the person and municipality enter into an agreement regarding the stoppage and to provide for the resumption of a nonconforming use of a property within five years of the nonconforming use being changed or discontinued.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS C.S.H.B. 2149 amends the Local Government Code to prohibit a municipality from requiring a person using a property in a manner considered to be a nonconforming use as a result of the adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary to stop the nonconforming use of the property unless the municipality enters into an agreement with the person. A person may continue the nonconforming use of the property unless the person enters into an agreement with the municipality, which must stipulate the amount of the payment to the person from the municipality to compensate for the costs incurred and the diminution in market value for stopping the nonconforming use of the property or stipulate the period during which the person may continue the nonconforming use of the property. C.S.H.B. 2149 entitles the owner or lessee of property who enters into an agreement with a municipality to stop the nonconforming use of the property to the same payments from the municipality or to the same continued nonconforming use of the property to which such an owner or lessee is entitled under current law if a municipality requires the owner or lessee to stop the nonconforming use. The bill changes the duration of that entitlement to continue the nonconforming use from until the owner or lessee recovers a certain amount from the municipality to a period, as determined by the owner or lessee, sufficient for the owner or lessee to recover the amount. For purposes of calculating the diminution in the property's market value to determine that payment amount, the bill changes the current market value that is used in the calculation from the current market value after the imposition of the requirement to stop the nonconforming use to the current market value after the municipality makes a determination that the municipality seeks to stop the nonconforming use. C.S.H.B. 2149 requires an agreement, in the event of a conflict in the choice of remedy by the applicable property owner or lessee, to incorporate the choice of remedy that controls. If an owner or lessee agrees to stop the nonconforming use, the owner or lessee and the municipality must enter into an agreement to stop the nonconforming use of the property in a timely manner after responding to the statutorily required written notice given by the municipality as provided by the bill's provisions. Accordingly, the bill clarifies that the notice, which currently references the requirement to stop the nonconforming use in general terms, must specifically state that the municipality seeks to stop the nonconforming use of the property and that the municipality is required to enter an agreement with the owner or lessee of the property for the purpose of stopping the nonconforming use and deciding which remedy the owner or lessee will choose. C.S.H.B. 2149 removes the authorization for a person who is entitled to a remedy and seeking payment from the municipality as the form of remedy to appeal the apportionment of the payment between each person if more than one person seeks such a payment from a municipality and requires a municipality instead to explicitly state the apportionment in an agreement entered into with a person to stop nonconforming land use. C.S.H.B. 2149 removes the authorization for a person who is entitled to a remedy and seeking to continue a nonconforming use as the form of remedy to appeal the municipality's or board of adjustment's decision continue to use the property in the same manner pending the appeal and authorizes a person seeking to continue a nonconforming land use to instead bring an action for declaratory relief, as authorized under the subsequently described bill provision, to continue to use the property in the same manner while the action is pending. C.S.H.B. 2149 authorizes a person using a property in a manner considered to be a nonconforming use as a result of the adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary who changes the use of the property to a conforming use or otherwise stops the nonconforming use of the property to resume the nonconforming use of the property if the person resumes such nonconforming use of the property before the fifth anniversary of the date the person changed or stopped the nonconforming use. This authorization expressly does not apply to a person who, pursuant to an agreement with the applicable municipality, changes or stops a nonconforming use of a property and receives a payment or continues the nonconforming use for a period of time. C.S.H.B. 2149 prohibits a municipality from prohibiting or restricting the following: the repair of a nonconforming structure; a person from continuing a nonconforming use of a property in accordance with general zoning regulations after the repair of a nonconforming structure or construction of a new building or structure to replace a damaged nonconforming structure; or modification or expansion of a nonconforming use of a property if the modification or expansion is necessary to continue the nonconforming use of the property or protect the health and safety of the property or occupants. C.S.H.B. 2149 authorizes a person to bring an action against a municipality for declaratory relief for a claimed violation of provisions that provide for the following: the requirement for a municipality to enter into an agreement with a person to stop nonconforming land use; the right to resume nonconforming land use; or the right to continue or modify nonconforming land use. The bill waives a municipality's immunity from suit and governmental immunity from liability for purposes of an action brought by a property owner or lessee under the bill's provisions. C.S.H.B. 2149 repeals Sections 211.019(j), (k), (m), (o), and (p), Local Government Code. C.S.H.B. 2149 applies to a property for which, on or after the bill's effective date, a municipality considers a proposed adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary under which a current conforming use of the property is a nonconforming use or receives a request to require a person to stop a nonconforming use of the property. A property for which a municipality considers a proposed adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary under which a current conforming use of the property is a nonconforming use or receives a request to require a person to stop a nonconforming use before the bill's effective date is governed by the law in effect immediately before the bill's effective date, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose.
EFFECTIVE DATE September 1, 2025.
COMPARISON OF INTRODUCED AND SUBSTITUTE While C.S.H.B. 2149 may differ from the introduced in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following summarizes the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill. Both the introduced and the substitute condition a municipality's authority to require a person using a property in a nonconforming manner to stop that nonconforming use on the municipality and the person entering into an agreement. However, the substitute prohibits the municipality from requiring the person to stop a nonconforming use of a property unless the municipality enters into an agreement with the person to stop the nonconforming use, whereas the introduced required the municipality to enter into an agreement with the person before the municipality may require the person to stop the nonconforming use. The substitute includes a provision absent from the introduced that changes the method for calculating the diminution in the property's market value for purposes of determining the payment amount from a municipality to a property owner or lessee.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
In 2024, the City of Lubbock's Amortization & Strategic Downzoning Study Committee met to consider whether the city should incorporate amortization into its Unified Development Code. Although the Lubbock City Council ultimately decided against adopting amortization, according to reporting by KCBD News, the bill author has informed the committee that various municipalities use amortization, a process whereby a municipality changes the zoning in an area in which a legal and conforming business sits, which makes that business an illegal and nonconforming use, and then the municipality gives the business a certain time period to earn back, or "amortize," its investment in the property and either bring the property into compliance or cease operation by the end of the period. The 88th Texas Legislature enacted S.B. 929, which entitles a property owner or lessee who is required by a municipality to stop a nonconforming use to certain payment from the municipality to compensate for such stoppage or to continue the nonconforming use of the property until the owner or lessee recovers the applicable amount of the property's market value. C.S.H.B. 2149 seeks to strengthen private property rights by amending amortization and nonconforming land use procedures to prohibit a municipality from requiring a person to stop a nonconforming use of a property unless the person and municipality enter into an agreement regarding the stoppage and to provide for the resumption of a nonconforming use of a property within five years of the nonconforming use being changed or discontinued.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 2149 amends the Local Government Code to prohibit a municipality from requiring a person using a property in a manner considered to be a nonconforming use as a result of the adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary to stop the nonconforming use of the property unless the municipality enters into an agreement with the person. A person may continue the nonconforming use of the property unless the person enters into an agreement with the municipality, which must stipulate the amount of the payment to the person from the municipality to compensate for the costs incurred and the diminution in market value for stopping the nonconforming use of the property or stipulate the period during which the person may continue the nonconforming use of the property.
C.S.H.B. 2149 entitles the owner or lessee of property who enters into an agreement with a municipality to stop the nonconforming use of the property to the same payments from the municipality or to the same continued nonconforming use of the property to which such an owner or lessee is entitled under current law if a municipality requires the owner or lessee to stop the nonconforming use. The bill changes the duration of that entitlement to continue the nonconforming use from until the owner or lessee recovers a certain amount from the municipality to a period, as determined by the owner or lessee, sufficient for the owner or lessee to recover the amount. For purposes of calculating the diminution in the property's market value to determine that payment amount, the bill changes the current market value that is used in the calculation from the current market value after the imposition of the requirement to stop the nonconforming use to the current market value after the municipality makes a determination that the municipality seeks to stop the nonconforming use.
C.S.H.B. 2149 requires an agreement, in the event of a conflict in the choice of remedy by the applicable property owner or lessee, to incorporate the choice of remedy that controls. If an owner or lessee agrees to stop the nonconforming use, the owner or lessee and the municipality must enter into an agreement to stop the nonconforming use of the property in a timely manner after responding to the statutorily required written notice given by the municipality as provided by the bill's provisions. Accordingly, the bill clarifies that the notice, which currently references the requirement to stop the nonconforming use in general terms, must specifically state that the municipality seeks to stop the nonconforming use of the property and that the municipality is required to enter an agreement with the owner or lessee of the property for the purpose of stopping the nonconforming use and deciding which remedy the owner or lessee will choose.
C.S.H.B. 2149 removes the authorization for a person who is entitled to a remedy and seeking payment from the municipality as the form of remedy to appeal the apportionment of the payment between each person if more than one person seeks such a payment from a municipality and requires a municipality instead to explicitly state the apportionment in an agreement entered into with a person to stop nonconforming land use.
C.S.H.B. 2149 removes the authorization for a person who is entitled to a remedy and seeking to continue a nonconforming use as the form of remedy to appeal the municipality's or board of adjustment's decision continue to use the property in the same manner pending the appeal and authorizes a person seeking to continue a nonconforming land use to instead bring an action for declaratory relief, as authorized under the subsequently described bill provision, to continue to use the property in the same manner while the action is pending.
C.S.H.B. 2149 authorizes a person using a property in a manner considered to be a nonconforming use as a result of the adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary who changes the use of the property to a conforming use or otherwise stops the nonconforming use of the property to resume the nonconforming use of the property if the person resumes such nonconforming use of the property before the fifth anniversary of the date the person changed or stopped the nonconforming use. This authorization expressly does not apply to a person who, pursuant to an agreement with the applicable municipality, changes or stops a nonconforming use of a property and receives a payment or continues the nonconforming use for a period of time.
C.S.H.B. 2149 prohibits a municipality from prohibiting or restricting the following:
the repair of a nonconforming structure;
a person from continuing a nonconforming use of a property in accordance with general zoning regulations after the repair of a nonconforming structure or construction of a new building or structure to replace a damaged nonconforming structure; or
modification or expansion of a nonconforming use of a property if the modification or expansion is necessary to continue the nonconforming use of the property or protect the health and safety of the property or occupants.
C.S.H.B. 2149 authorizes a person to bring an action against a municipality for declaratory relief for a claimed violation of provisions that provide for the following:
the requirement for a municipality to enter into an agreement with a person to stop nonconforming land use;
the right to resume nonconforming land use; or
the right to continue or modify nonconforming land use.
The bill waives a municipality's immunity from suit and governmental immunity from liability for purposes of an action brought by a property owner or lessee under the bill's provisions.
C.S.H.B. 2149 repeals Sections 211.019(j), (k), (m), (o), and (p), Local Government Code.
C.S.H.B. 2149 applies to a property for which, on or after the bill's effective date, a municipality considers a proposed adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary under which a current conforming use of the property is a nonconforming use or receives a request to require a person to stop a nonconforming use of the property. A property for which a municipality considers a proposed adoption of or change to a zoning regulation or boundary under which a current conforming use of the property is a nonconforming use or receives a request to require a person to stop a nonconforming use before the bill's effective date is governed by the law in effect immediately before the bill's effective date, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose.
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2025.
COMPARISON OF INTRODUCED AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 2149 may differ from the introduced in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following summarizes the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
Both the introduced and the substitute condition a municipality's authority to require a person using a property in a nonconforming manner to stop that nonconforming use on the municipality and the person entering into an agreement. However, the substitute prohibits the municipality from requiring the person to stop a nonconforming use of a property unless the municipality enters into an agreement with the person to stop the nonconforming use, whereas the introduced required the municipality to enter into an agreement with the person before the municipality may require the person to stop the nonconforming use.
The substitute includes a provision absent from the introduced that changes the method for calculating the diminution in the property's market value for purposes of determining the payment amount from a municipality to a property owner or lessee.