Texas lawmakers are examining whether local governments are complying with a state law designed to prevent cities and counties from regulating in areas already governed by state law—and whether stronger enforcement tools are needed to ensure compliance.
The Texas House Select Committee on Governmental Oversight held its first hearing Thursday to review implementation of the Texas Regulatory Consistency Act, a 2023 law that limits local regulations in broad areas of state law. Supporters say the measure helps businesses by ensuring consistent rules across Texas, while opponents argue it restricts local control.
Committee Chairman Cody Vasut (R–Angleton) began the hearing by noting that lawmakers have been tasked with determining whether local governments have repealed ordinances that conflict with the law and whether additional enforcement mechanisms may be warranted.
“We’re going to investigate and identify local ordinances that conflict with the act and determine whether local governments are unlawfully enforcing such ordinances,” Vasut said.
The law preempts local regulations in areas covered by several sections of state law, including the Agriculture Code, Business & Commerce Code, Finance Code, Insurance Code, Labor Code, Natural Resources Code, Occupations Code, and Property Code.
James Quintero of the Texas Public Policy Foundation argued that many local governments have made little effort to review their ordinances since the law took effect.
“One of the things that I’ve noticed in my 20 years or so at the Texas Public Policy Foundation is sometimes the legislature can pass a law, but it doesn’t necessarily translate into local action,” Quintero told lawmakers.
Quintero said his organization submitted public information requests to a number of cities and counties seeking records showing what actions they had taken to comply with the law.
“In every case those entities came back and effectively implied that they had done nothing,” he said.
According to Quintero, Dallas was the lone exception. He testified that the city identified approximately 100 ordinances that could potentially conflict with the law but repealed only a handful after receiving notice of potential litigation from the foundation.
TPPF is currently appealing a district court ruling in litigation against Dallas involving dozens of city ordinances it argues are preempted by state law.
Quintero also pointed to examples of ordinances that remain on local code books despite having been invalidated by either courts or state legislation.
He cited Austin’s paid sick leave mandate and Brownsville’s single-use plastic bag ban, both of which he said can still be found in municipal code books despite no longer being enforceable. He argued that leaving such provisions in place creates confusion for residents and businesses trying to determine what rules actually apply.
“If you’re just John Q. Public looking to see, ‘Hey, what laws, what ordinances, what regulations am I subject to,’ you have to effectively have a legal degree in some measure of historical knowledge to know, well, this one’s on the books, but it’s not enforced,” Quintero said.
Bill Longley, general counsel for the Texas Municipal League, pushed back on the suggestion that cities are intentionally ignoring the legislature’s directive.
“I don’t think cities are ignoring the law,” Longley said. “Cities call our legal department regularly to ask about how this law might apply to various ordinances that they’re considering adopting.”
“There are lots of questions about the extent of the field preemption, and I don’t think anyone has an answer to that,” he said.
The hearing also raised questions about whether the current enforcement mechanism established by the law is sufficient.
State Rep. Mitch Little (R–Lewisville) noted that the Texas Regulatory Consistency Act was enacted nearly three years ago, yet major legal questions surrounding the law remain unresolved.
“It’s now the year of our Lord 2026,” Little said. “None of the challenges have reached the Texas Supreme Court.”
Little argued that because lawsuits are currently brought by private individuals, associations, or businesses, cities can spend years litigating threshold issues before courts ever reach the question of whether an ordinance actually violates state law.
“The first challenge from the municipality is you lack standing,” said Little. “Now the plaintiffs are on a three-year ride up to the Court of Appeals, at best to the Texas Supreme Court, and all the way back down before a decision is made on the basic question of do you have standing.”
As a potential solution, Little suggested giving the attorney general direct authority to enforce the law and seek expedited judicial review.
“It seems to me a much more efficient process would be that the Attorney General would have standing to bring the lawsuit,” he said.
Little also suggested requiring cities to conduct periodic reviews of their ordinances and publicly identify provisions that conflict with state law.
“Every city should be required to audit its ordinances to determine their compliance with TRCA,” said Little. “And then, if they are out of compliance and are being repealed, they should have to publish that to the public.”
Quintero endorsed the proposal, calling an expedited review process “exactly what’s needed here.”
The discussion appeared to align with concerns raised by Vasut, who suggested lawmakers may need to consider stronger enforcement mechanisms moving forward.
Among the ideas discussed during the hearing were empowering the attorney general to issue notices of noncompliance, requiring expedited judicial review of disputed ordinances, and imposing penalties on local governments that continue enforcing ordinances found to violate state law.
The committee is expected to continue studying the issue ahead of the 2027 legislative session, when lawmakers could consider changes to the Texas Regulatory Consistency Act and its enforcement provisions.
