[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6087160,"mediaKeyId","2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7","parentId",2891357,"title","Developers press for higher 9% LIHTC cap as rising construction costs shrink projects; preservation advocates warn of lost projects","audioSeconds",310,"startMs",8120000,"endMs",8430000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7&start=8120&end=8430","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7/thumbnail_8120000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6087160/Texas/Developers-press-for-higher-9-LIHTC-cap-as-rising-construction-costs-shrink-projects-preservation-advocates-warn-of-lost-projects","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6087160-c09087ad902c8c8622a0d1ac2f3cd6e5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770445288&Signature=LIR0Oqu~1P0xfDTalH1g1vuwpz0Zc9Cfqc9Qdhmwfry0fCzIoEz9fmCw63rQdJocdN4yNmiMESBR3DMVsR1tWJOQeHysDIInGEE~lAztoXvA24E7zt5-2yAVwwO3eEaEaaB2yx887CXZXDrBko3s5QQxE62uL3XssXpRuYvbhc~CsEv825zpGe9SrPN9xbuO4bHzVRGeNNwoe7HCmqsqq-rqkforUsPJj0x~O6mUqod9qlQ2e-koBmz0cu2TZdbMzRfdHOhVc~GCgtt0KddRSmag2MykMc9EmmdG0aOwy0WOj5OAv~FUdwt-Zs3mcIMd-7AvWrm213jCUk8Dvn9~HA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Texas State Legislature","date","2025-04-07T00:00:00Z","article","Senate Bill 8 98, carried by Senator Juan Hinojosa (Senator Blanco laid it out in committee), would increase the statutory cap on per‑development awards of 9% Low‑Income Housing Tax Credits from $2,000,000 to $3,000,000 to compensate for construction inflation and rising costs.

Bobby Bolling, a developer from El Paso, and others representing the Texas Affiliation of Affordable Housing Providers argued that a larger per‑project cap would create economies of scale, reduce per‑unit construction costs, and allow more units to be produced in single developments. They said the current $2 million cap has not been updated since 2011 despite large increases in construction costs and inflation; witnesses cited a 43% inflation increase and a 69% increase in multifamily construction costs since the cap was set.

Opponents, including Foundation Communities, Texas Housers and other preservation advocates, warned that the state’s overall allocation of tax credits would not grow simply by raising the per‑development cap. Those witnesses said a fixed statewide pool divided among larger per‑project awards would likely award fewer total projects in a given funding round and could reduce the number of communities that receive credits — including preservation projects that renovate existing affordable properties.

Tracy Fine of National Church Residences said preservation projects cannot increase unit counts and therefore would not benefit from a larger award; tougher competition for a static pool could reduce preservation awards. Ben Martin of Texas Housers called the cap increase a reallocation of the same credit pool that could result in fewer projects statewide even as some projects get more resources.

Senators invited comment on possible mitigations, such as exempting preservation or at‑risk set‑asides from a higher per‑project cap or giving the state board rulemaking discretion to set caps by region or set‑aside. The committee closed public testimony and left the bill pending for further consideration.

Ending: Lawmakers asked TDHCA and stakeholders for additional modeling showing how changes to the per‑project cap would affect the number of awards and units statewide; committee left SB 8 98 pending.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Committee on Local Government (Part I) April 7, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Bill 8 98 would raise the per‑development cap on 9% low‑income housing tax credits from $2 million to $3 million to account for higher construction and development costs.","taxTitle","Committee on Local Government, Senate, Legislative, Texas","taxId",16927,"location","Texas","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6087170,"Senate panel hears competing views on HOA reforms aimed at resident control and limits on fines, assessments",378,266000,644000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7&start=266&end=644","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7/thumbnail_266000.jpg","/articles/6087170/Texas/Senate-panel-hears-competing-views-on-HOA-reforms-aimed-at-resident-control-and-limits-on-fines-assessments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6087170-5fab8e1199bc6b35125f7d95b3c13593/orig.mp4?Expires=1770445288&Signature=FZG9aRI81sZvuNE3kUxI8GyasnXPqkjZ9XUb4Il1cGlp47hRFN-2ja0PWfQMENibmRzbEcvtQDeCPrFLx1IDqmJgnNdzOtnW0VKeuL9Iqce4ucxGDOXBG2exisae~XpZOlYNuBuv1G1utav9wmT4SnwhoNeaHCEi5BaBNUWoytkJqYUJvKqgjQmlSWE6zeOjvYEPoPyjwfigjeAy-UoRqShojZ3SvF0ibqar6ZQ4SBtEcfb9rRKaC6hT1ZqLm~a-lOqQsvBLpk5KkPyWsKh55wklZbQsGV5VsJiBMmBZinFvU8c-WjVPXnY5FsDfIKTvp9JhrLZ~IMJHeDCvD-s04w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 19 35, carried by Senator Juan Hinojosa, was the focus of a lengthy committee discussion Wednesday on reforms intended to increase homeowner control and limit HOA assessments and fines.

Hinojosa said the bill would impose clearer timelines for when residents gain voting control of community association boards, require in‑person meetings within 10 miles of a subdivision when a majority of board members are not elected by owners, cap ongoing fines for continuing violations and limit annual regular assessment increases to 5% unless a majority of owners vote to exceed the cap.

Representatives of community association groups and property‑management interests testified in opposition or raised concerns. Clint Brown of the Texas Legislative Action Committee (a division of the Community Associations Institute) and Mike McLaughlin of Texas Community Association Advocates urged caution on provisions they said could compel volunteer boards to underfund reserves and deferred maintenance. Both witnesses emphasized that associations are nonprofits funded by owners and warned that a strict cap on annual assessment increases or a requirement that the entire membership vote to exceed a 5% increase could make it impossible to address sudden, large‑ticket repairs (roofs, foundations) or insurance‑related costs.

JD Hale of the Texas Association of Builders, speaking for developers, expressed particular concern about shortening or eliminating declarant (developer) control periods. He said developers make large upfront investments and need a degree of control while lots are still for sale and the development is completed.

Senator Hinojosa and other senators pressed witnesses about existing statutory protections and tools available to homeowners, including chapter 209 of the Texas Property Code, which grants owners the right to serve on boards. Witnesses responded that those protections do not always translate into practice in some communities and that the bill aims to address abuses where developer control extends long past initial buildout.

Public testimony was limited; the committee accepted submitted statements and encouraged stakeholders to work on drafting. The committee closed public testimony and left SB 19 35 pending.

Ending: Senators asked the bill author and stakeholders to meet to refine language addressing maintenance funding, developer control timelines and enforcement of owners’ rights.","Senate Bill 19 35, carried by Senator Juan Hinojosa, was the focus of a lengthy committee discussion Wednesday on reforms intended to increase homeowner control and limit HOA assessments and fines.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6087176,"Senate committee debates ban on local guaranteed‑income programs as residents and advocates testify",491,2849000,3340000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7&start=2849&end=3340","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7/thumbnail_2849000.jpg","/articles/6087176/Texas/Senate-committee-debates-ban-on-local-guaranteedincome-programs-as-residents-and-advocates-testify","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6087176-582d9623e06fb575a0395bdb26781902/orig.mp4?Expires=1770445288&Signature=A2FmXC-UXCxxcO1E5R7sCCmon~PDs8W0I2Bl-FQRJOHYcb45Qo9o9xqtzVh8yuu29NXK40Czdhya6GTlPkfQgnH-SZQWS54MfHFocDOGznnGQryJqkreoFfo5ocd9mlgYrPWc4aSZ7MHdVb7ujn0bqe~tbPiQnPFYqXicqKv68Xo43yjMvgo2oE9rw-LOXtY8O5ffStXvZK~tRRyP1fXQ9CAJ2wvl~gpysmDeqkfwr1SDMAfEQL1CSMfoNM1kN2Bo9rVnviWCurkxZJedEGu1DCwEKZ0~FzScWdOcgu1pYkuv0UKVDomonuyl7tDgeFvEeLllyWdsY3B63V6Y6UYQg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 20 10, filed by Senator Paul Bettencourt, drew a lengthy and divided public hearing Wednesday in the Committee on Local Government, with proponents urging a statewide ban on local guaranteed‑income (GI) pilots and opponents describing personal and community benefits from recent programs.

Bettencourt said the bill is intended to enforce Article 3, Section 52 of the Texas Constitution, which prohibits gifts of public money to individuals, and to stop counties and cities from using federal or local funds to run guaranteed‑income schemes he described as \"lottery socialism.\" He said some local governments used pandemic federal funds to launch large cash programs that were not authorized under state law.

Supporters of the bill included Paige Terryberry of FGA Action and James Quintero of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, who said GI programs discourage work, foster dependency, and improperly redirect taxpayer funds. They noted that several states already have restrictions on guaranteed‑income pilots.

Opponents and several recipients of pilot payments told a different story. Witnesses who identified themselves as program participants described receiving $500 monthly for a period and said that the payments stabilized housing, helped them secure work or steady caregiving, and prevented evictions. Ingrid Cleveland said guaranteed income helped her obtain a living‑wage job, complete training, and eventually buy a house; other recipients from San Antonio and Bexar County reported improved food security and reduced financial stress.

Experts and advocates provided data and studies in both directions. Paige Terryberry and national providers cited research she said showed decreased debt, modest employment effects, and improved housing outcomes in several pilots. Opponents pointed to the Seattle and Denver studies where some researchers found reductions in hours worked for specific groups.

Much of the committee's questioning focused on the source of money used in local GI pilots. Bettencourt and others stressed the constitutional gift clause; witnesses identified federal COVID relief (ARPA) and other funds as sources of local program funding. Several senators asked whether federal grant conditions or maintenance‑of‑effort rules could constrain state or local decisions; stakeholders and TDHCA‑adjacent witnesses said that federal funds often come with conditions but that local governments previously used available federal funds to implement pilots.

Committee members repeatedly asked for more precise accounting of program costs and data about outcomes; witnesses agreed that administrative costs could be substantial. The Harris County program was cited often: witnesses said it attracted more than 82,000 applications for a lottery that awarded roughly 1,900 households and that county contracts included substantial technology and administrative fees. Kim Ogg, who testified on other bills, highlighted concerns about the large sums spent on program administration and the handling of applicant data.

No vote occurred. The committee left Senate Bill 20 10 pending and signaled it would continue work on legal definitions and the interaction between federal grant rules and state constitutional limits.

Ending: The bill remains pending as legislators requested state agencies and counties provide clearer accounting of spending, data on outcomes, and legal analyses about the use of federal funds.","Senate Bill 20 10 would prohibit cities and counties from adopting guaranteed‑income programs. Supporters called the programs redistributive and legally questionable; opponents, including program recipients, testified that pilots improved housing stability and well‑being.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6087181,"Senate committee hears calls to raise penalties for public contracting abuses after Harris County cases",488,2984000,3472000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7&start=2984&end=3472","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7/thumbnail_2984000.jpg","/articles/6087181/Texas/Senate-committee-hears-calls-to-raise-penalties-for-public-contracting-abuses-after-Harris-County-cases","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6087181-ebb325e3bfe44a828efb402b91379f90/orig.mp4?Expires=1770445288&Signature=dau-UAAJHUuBiUWeUU~tSgG4W9d7RMEgRpKkzOnWE~5g-xHoPQ09~Ff5wck5WhKpgmQ4CgNGK7kU43-o89d5x70g586Hl8BKZGn-s7FrR5cS6~aBBWwcz39b9eSNYBKXCGdUym7BdnY-NPqiJxU0Hsm3CZ0lL30sfP0dLH~monhZ3kGvHxF35deNUbNUuuVugm~crh-bp2QJaCBYZoPm3e8U9G~PYc3pTqdlpHT2QWDmN2pX6jkgZrY92srTFU2w-AGzbstgQyOfWWDCo18~hDp~PVPNNGpy3viPHeLUGUQfrY9x7t8WmgX8uzwB7R7OthE-8eEV3snMHIt11O4b0g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Committee on Local Government members on Wednesday heard testimony urging lawmakers to strengthen criminal penalties for public contracting abuses, including bid rigging and misuse of official information.

The committee discussed Senate Bill 2,046, filed by Senator Paul Bettencourt, which would increase the criminal penalties tied to violations of county purchasing laws and create a tiered penalty structure keyed to contract amounts. Bettencourt said current sanctions — including a class C misdemeanor for some practices — are inadequate deterrents for schemes that can involve millions of taxpayer dollars.

The bill would raise penalties and create a tiered system linking the severity of a punishment to the contract amount and would add new penalties for intentional, repeated efforts to break up procurements to avoid competitive bidding. Bettencourt told the committee the bill is intended to give prosecutors more workable tools and send a clearer message about stewardship of public funds.

Several invited witnesses described high-profile cases in Harris County as evidence that the current statutory penalties are too low. Kim Ogg, the former Harris County district attorney, described investigations into pandemic-era contracting and testified that existing penalties did not reflect the seriousness of the alleged misconduct. Ogg cited an 11-million-dollar outreach contract and a $35-million technology contract in her testimony and said increasing penalties would strengthen deterrence.

Josh Reno, deputy attorney general for criminal justice, told senators the change would provide \"teeth\" so officials take procurement rules seriously. He and Ogg both urged lawmakers to consider felony-level penalties tied to the value of improperly steered contracts rather than the present low-level misdemeanor treatment.

Opponents or skeptics at the hearing urged caution about presuming guilt in high-profile matters and noted prosecutorial discretion and proof issues. Senator Angela West pressed Ogg and Reno about the outcomes of recent indictments tied to these procurement controversies; witnesses acknowledged some cases resulted in dismissals or pretrial diversion and said statute of limitations and evidentiary questions complicated prosecutions.

Supporters, including James Quintero of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, framed the bill as a response to rising local-government lawlessness and a needed step to protect taxpayers and the competitive procurement process. Members of the committee said they expect to refine the penalty thresholds and asked witnesses for examples and further evidence on which thresholds would be effective.

No vote was taken. The committee left Senate Bill 2,046 pending for further work; witnesses and senators said they would continue refining the language, including possible adjustments to the dollar thresholds used to trigger higher penalties.

Ending: The committee directed continued work on the measure, with senators asking for additional examples and for the attorney general's office and other stakeholders to help calibrate penalty levels tied to contract values.","Lawmakers and criminal-justice witnesses urged the Senate Committee on Local Government to increase criminal penalties for circumventing competitive bidding rules and misuse of official information, citing cases in Harris County and across Texas as examples of weak deterrents under current law.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6087165,"Senators consider limits on noncontiguous annexations by special districts after landowner concerns",214,1928000,2142000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7&start=1928&end=2142","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2891357-591f847c3f7d6bf208f33666756d0fe7/thumbnail_1928000.jpg","/articles/6087165/Texas/Senators-consider-limits-on-noncontiguous-annexations-by-special-districts-after-landowner-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6087165-af37aec85123367ba5a3f4bd9053850e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770445288&Signature=K3oud7wBvaVXE04jD0j8UqNxZGfKc2OMK6M5F9cml-uDuyMIoauSceF~Anjzx1KkwpHK814IeUYUNPG8mm3Je6D5QDCeF2WiOivlD3nyypBmp~XYQj1Gm5oOtd6xh~vM2GHcmC5oAyhUG7~0-VFp0JiDHqwBMFXeBHtyo0FSznoZy9FbL9eRNd1qmxcfkPgECxO6wmotlW8e0Uy7gRD8jv8TeO-BhJoVtFX7wMTm-HzRvN~KY7wsG0lNeNxXRg3RlQ-TjZS-k1uXDpWiMDhLDbYnes6uTrWAIxSMLiLcZvC0hGP4OCRwRG1DQ0YHL4~VjieZsgEh1d6gT85NGbbJRw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 19 65, filed for Senator Royce West and carried in committee by Senator Middleton on behalf of Senator John King, tackled a recurring issue in several counties: special‑purpose districts annexing noncontiguous tracts of land and acquiring taxing and condemnation authority without clear local notice.

Middleton said some special districts had added land miles away from their established boundaries, creating surprise for neighboring landowners and local officials when services or development plans were proposed. The bill would prohibit certain special districts — including municipal utility districts (MUDs), special utility districts, municipal management districts, water improvement districts and water control and improvement districts (WCIDs) — from annexing noncontiguous parcels located more than 200 feet from the district at the time of the proposed addition. The 200‑foot figure was said to match certain existing requirements used in other state regulatory settings.

The bill also would expand notice: petitioning districts must mail certified notice of hearings to each landowner in the area to be annexed and to any municipality in which the land will be located or adjacent municipalities, giving local officials and affected landowners more opportunity to participate.

Public testimony highlighted practical concerns. Jerry Holman, who represents Harris County Freshwater Supply District 61 and operates Harris County MUD 248, said many MUDs serve noncontiguous properties at landowners’ specific request and that rigid distance limits could block service to property that otherwise would not be developable without district utilities. He said the typical practice is that landowners ask to be annexed to get water and sewer service and that a strict 200‑foot rule could prevent necessary service extensions.

Trey Larry, representing land‑use and district counsel groups, urged caution about prescribing a fixed distance, arguing that every situation is unique and that an arbitrary distance could prevent necessary, cost‑effective service. He noted counties and multiple jurisdictions sometimes complicate mapping and utility service decisions.

Other members and witnesses discussed examples where noncontiguous annexations were used to serve long linear service connections or to tie into regional wastewater systems located across municipal boundaries. The committee asked the author and stakeholders to continue discussions; senators said they would seek drafting approaches that preserve the ability to extend needed utility service while closing perceived loopholes that permit seemingly opportunistic annexations.

Ending: The committee left Senate Bill 19 65 pending and asked district operators, county officials and the bill author’s staff to propose technical edits, possible exceptions for landowner‑initiated annexations or alternative distance‑based criteria.","Senate Bill 19 65 would bar certain special‑purpose districts from annexing noncontiguous land located more than 200 feet from their boundaries, add expanded notice requirements and require certified mailed notices to landowners and adjacent municipalities.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Developers press for higher 9% LIHTC cap as rising construction costs shrink projects; preservation advocates warn of lost projects

Senate panel hears competing views on HOA reforms aimed at resident control and limits on fines, assessments

Senate committee debates ban on local guaranteed‑income programs as residents and advocates testify

Senate committee hears calls to raise penalties for public contracting abuses after Harris County cases

Senators consider limits on noncontiguous annexations by special districts after landowner concerns