How much oversight should the state have over local ordinances? Texas legislators weigh impact of 2023 law

Bill Longley, general counsel for the Texas Municipal League, said HB 2127 has had a “significant impact” on city operations. The TML, an advocacy group that represents the majority of Texas’ cities at the Capitol, receives multiple calls per month from local leaders about the law and whether they can adopt certain ordinances, he told lawmakers.

Longley said the law’s broad structure, which prohibits local governments from adopting ordinances preempted by nine sections of state code, makes it hard for cities to determine if they can pass new rules. He said some cities may be wary of creating new ordinances that risk violating the law, while others have changed or repealed past ordinances to avoid lawsuits.

“I think it certainly has shaped behavior at the local level and given cities something to think about and consider whenever any ordinance is proposed: How does this work within this new framework under the act?” Longley told lawmakers June 4. “Some cities have gone in and repealed ordinances that they believe aren't preempted, but there's no objective standard here.”

A 2025 study from George Mason University named Texas as the fifth-most regulated state in the nation, with more than 274,000 rules and restrictions on the books. Streamlining HB 2127 to ensure some local ordinances are removed could help reduce that number, Quintero said.

“Here we are, three years from the date of the passage of that bill, and there's not been a whole lot done,” he told lawmakers. “I tend to view [HB] 2127 as a partial answer to that problem. ... We labor under too much government, and if we are to move Texas in a better direction, then we need broad-based preemption mechanisms like the Death Star bill.”

Vasut suggested updating state law to “require cities to kind of do a sunset review of some of their ordinances” periodically to ensure they are not preempted, which Quintero called “an excellent idea.”

More details

State Rep. Richard Peña Raymond, D-Laredo, said he supported the law because it allowed legislators to step in when they felt local rules may harm their constituents. He added that few people tend to vote in municipal elections and may not always know about the ordinances local officials are passing.

“It's a very, very small percentage of people who will vote for the members who get on their city council, and those council members’ [decisions] affect 100% of the people that live in that city,” he said.

Raymond argued that it was fair for city council members and other elected leaders to push back against HB 2127, and said he did not believe municipalities were intentionally violating the law.

“They say they have the right to say, ‘Man, we're going to fight this tooth and nail.’ That's OK,” Raymond said. “They have that right as [local] elected officials, just as we have the rights of elected officials in the state Legislature to say that we don't agree with what certain cities are doing.”

Other Democratic lawmakers questioned how the law was fair for Texas’ diverse cities, which they said have unique needs based on their region and size.

“That uniqueness is part of what gives us Texas its character,” Rep. Armando Lucio Walle, D-Houston, said. “Why even have a city council; why even have a mayor if we're going to be the one that dictates what you do and can't do?”