SB304

Regular Session

Relating to the jurisdiction of municipal courts over health and safety and nuisance abatement ordinances.

ModeratePlan for compliance

Low Cost

Effective:2025-09-01

Enforcing Agencies

Municipal Courts (in cities that adopt the enabling ordinance) • Municipal Code Enforcement Departments • City Attorneys

Compliance Analysis

Key implementation requirements and action items for compliance with this legislation

Implementation Timeline

Effective Date: September 1, 2025
Compliance Deadline: Immediate upon local adoption. While the state law is effective 9/1/25, enforcement begins only after individual City Councils pass enabling ordinances.
Agency Rulemaking: No state-level rulemaking is required. However, municipalities must draft and pass local ordinances to vest their courts with this jurisdiction. Expect major metropolitan areas to adopt these powers by Q4 2025.

Immediate Action Plan

1. Audit Portfolio: Conduct physical inspections of all Texas properties for "nuisance" conditions (debris, stalled construction, junked vehicles) and resolve them before September 1, 2025.
2. Monitor Local Agendas: Direct government affairs teams to monitor City Council agendas in your operating jurisdictions for ordinances adopting SB304 powers.
3. Update SOPs: Revise legal intake procedures to treat Municipal Court summonses with the same priority as District Court lawsuits.
4. Secure Sites: Ensure all outdoor storage and industrial laydown yards are screened from public view to reduce probable cause for drive-by inspections.

Operational Changes Required

Contracts

Commercial Leases (NNN): Amend Triple Net leases to explicitly define "nuisance abatement" and violations of LGC Ch. 214 (Dangerous Structures) or Transportation Code Ch. 683 (Junked Vehicles) as tenant defaults. Indemnification clauses must cover municipal demolition liens.
Lending Agreements: Lenders must update loan covenants to classify Municipal Court nuisance citations as events of default, triggering early intervention rights before the asset is seized or demolished.
Vendor Agreements: Construction and waste management contracts require strict indemnification for debris or equipment storage that triggers "public nuisance" citations.

Hiring/Training

Mailroom & Reception: Train staff to immediately escalate any correspondence from "Municipal Court" or "Code Enforcement." These can no longer be treated as simple administrative tickets; they are now potential precursors to asset seizure.
Facility Management: Site managers must be trained on "curb appeal" liability. If a violation is visible from the public right-of-way, it establishes probable cause for a search warrant.

Reporting & Record-Keeping

Abatement Logs: Create a centralized log of all code enforcement interactions. You must document remedial actions to defend against "failure to abate" claims in court.
Vehicle Inventory: Automotive and salvage businesses must maintain real-time records proving vehicles on-site are active projects (work orders, current registration) to prevent classification as "junked vehicles" subject to seizure.
Permit Management: Ensure all renovation permits are active and displayed. An expired permit on a stalled site is a primary trigger for a "dangerous structure" warrant.

Fees & Costs

Demolition Liens: The law allows cities to assess the cost of demolition and cleanup against the property owner. These costs attach as a priority lien on the real estate.
Uninsurable Losses: Review policies immediately. Most Commercial General Liability (CGL) policies exclude losses resulting from government ordinance enforcement or seizure.

Strategic Ambiguities & Considerations

Concurrent Jurisdiction Conflicts: The law grants Municipal Courts jurisdiction concurrent with District Courts. It is currently unclear how conflicts will be resolved if a property owner files for injunctive relief in District Court while the City simultaneously pursues a demolition warrant in Municipal Court. This creates a "race to the courthouse" scenario.
Procedural Inconsistency: Municipal Courts typically handle high-volume, low-complexity criminal traffic matters. Many are ill-equipped for complex civil property litigation. Expect significant inconsistency in evidentiary standards and due process protections until appellate precedents are established.

Need Help Understanding Implementation?

Our government affairs experts can walk you through this bill's specific impact on your operations.

Schedule Consultation

Information presented is for general knowledge only and is provided without warranty, express or implied. Consult qualified government affairs professionals and legal counsel before making compliance decisions.

Legislative Timeline

This bill's path through the Texas Legislature

TopicsCourts Courts--municipal City Government City Government--general Safety Search Warrants Nuisances

Official Analysis

View HRO Analysis View All Bill Documents

BILL ANALYSIS

Senate Research Center	S.B. 304
89R857 JTZ-D	By: Perry
	Local Government
	3/6/2025
	As Filed

AUTHOR'S / SPONSOR'S STATEMENT OF INTENT

A municipal court of record is required to provide a court reporter to create and preserve a record in cases tried before the court, while an ordinary municipal court typically does not create or preserve a record. The practical effect of this difference surfaces on appeal. Appeals from either type of municipal court are generally to the county court. Appeals from a municipal court are tried de novo, meaning that the case is tried again from the beginning, and all the evidence and witnesses must be presented again. On the other hand, an appeal from a municipal court of record is based on specific points of error as contained in the "record" of the court.

Texas law allows municipal courts of record to enforce health and safety and nuisance abatement ordinances within the city limits. However, municipal courts are not currently allowed to enforce these types of ordinances.

This legislation would allow a city to pass an ordinance permitting a municipal court to enforce health and safety and nuisance abatement ordinances. Individual city councils would be permitted to grant their municipal court the same jurisdiction as a municipal court of record.

As proposed, S.B. 304 amends current law relating to the jurisdiction of municipal courts over health and safety and nuisance abatement ordinances.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

This bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, institution, or agency.

SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS

SECTION 1. Amends Section 29.003, Government Code, by adding Subsection (a-1), as follows:

(a-1) Authorizes the governing body of a municipality by ordinance to provide that a municipal court has:

(1) civil jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing municipal ordinances enacted under Subchapter A (Dangerous Structures), Chapter 214 (Municipal Regulation of Housing and Other Structures), Local Government Code, or Subchapter E (Junked Vehicles: Public Nuisance; Abatement), Chapter 683 (Abandoned Motor Vehicles), Transportation Code;

(2) concurrent jurisdiction with a district court or a county court at law under Subchapter B (Municipal Health and Safety Ordinances), Chapter 54 (Enforcement of Municipal Ordinances), Local Government Code, within the municipality's territorial limits and property owned by the municipality located in the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing health and safety and nuisance abatement ordinances; and

(3) authority to issue search warrants for the purpose of investigating a health and safety or nuisance abatement ordinance violation and seizure warrants for the purpose of securing, removing, or demolishing the offending property and removing the debris from the premises.

SECTION 2. Effective date: September 1, 2025.

Senate Authors

Sen. Charles PerryRepublican · Primary Author

Coauthors (1)

Royce West (D)

House Sponsor

Rep. Drew DarbyRepublican · Primary Sponsor

Bill Text(with markup)

S.B. No. 304

View bill text in multiple formats on Texas Legislature website

Fiscal NoteView Original

	AN ACT
	relating to the jurisdiction of municipal courts over health and
	safety and nuisance abatement ordinances.
	BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
	SECTION 1. Section 29.003, Government Code, is amended by
	adding Subsection (a-1) to read as follows:
	(a-1) The governing body of a municipality by ordinance may
	provide that the court has:
	(1) civil jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing
	municipal ordinances enacted under Subchapter A, Chapter 214, Local
	Government Code, or Subchapter E, Chapter 683, Transportation Code;
	(2) concurrent jurisdiction with a district court or a
	county court at law under Subchapter B, Chapter 54, Local
	Government Code, within the municipality's territorial limits and
	property owned by the municipality located in the municipality's
	extraterritorial jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing health
	and safety and nuisance abatement ordinances; and
	(3) authority to issue:
	(A) search warrants for the purpose of
	investigating a health and safety or nuisance abatement ordinance
	violation; and
	(B) seizure warrants for the purpose of securing,
	removing, or demolishing the offending property and removing the
	debris from the premises.
	SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 2025.

LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas

FISCAL NOTE, 89TH LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION


March 8, 2025

TO:	Honorable Paul Bettencourt, Chair, Senate Committee on Local Government

FROM:	Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board

IN RE:	SB304 by Perry (Relating to the jurisdiction of municipal courts over health and safety and nuisance abatement ordinances.), As Introduced

No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

It is assumed that any costs associated with the bill could be absorbed using existing resources.

Local Government Impact

No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.

Source Agencies:

212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council

LBB Staff:

JMc, SZ, BC, CWi

Related Legislation

Explore more bills from this author and on related topics

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about SB304

What does Texas SB304 do?

SB304 fundamentally accelerates the timeline for government seizure and demolition of private property by authorizing Municipal Courts to issue civil search and seizure warrants for dangerous structures and junked vehicles. This legislation removes the procedural buffer of District Courts, allowing cities to expedite enforcement actions against distressed commercial assets, industrial facilities, and automotive businesses through local, high-volume venues. Implementation Timeline Effective Date: September 1, 2025 Compliance Deadline: Immediate upon local adoption.

Who authored SB304?

SB304 was authored by Texas Senator Charles Perry during the Regular Session.

When was SB304 signed into law?

SB304 was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on May 15, 2025.

Which agencies enforce SB304?

SB304 is enforced by Municipal Courts (in cities that adopt the enabling ordinance), Municipal Code Enforcement Departments and City Attorneys.

How urgent is compliance with SB304?

The compliance urgency for SB304 is rated as "moderate". Businesses and organizations should review the requirements and timeline to ensure timely compliance.

What is the cost impact of SB304?

The cost impact of SB304 is estimated as "low". This may vary based on industry and implementation requirements.

What topics does SB304 address?

SB304 addresses topics including courts, courts--municipal, city government, city government--general and safety.

Legislative data provided by LegiScanLast updated: November 25, 2025

Need Strategic Guidance on This Bill?

Need help with Government Relations, Lobbying, or compliance? JD Key Consulting has the expertise you're looking for.