Monitoring the Session

HB 3892

Bell Setback Bill Also Bars County Minimum Lot Sizes

Did not pass

Verdict: Smells

SmellsReviewed
Rep. Cecil Bell Jr.RHouse 3
Why it's charged
Caption mismatch

THE TEXT

“The commissioners court is prohibited from adopting minimum lot”…

Bill text, introduced version (I)

The caption speaks only of subdivision setbacks, but the body also bans county lot frontage minimums on new roads and lists minimum lot size, width and depth as off limits. The body cuts county power more widely than the caption says.

Caption mismatch

Reviewed · Nov 1, 2026 · Headline, summary and grade are analysis of the bill text, not a finding about any person · How we grade

Caption

relating to county regulation of subdivision setbacks.

Caption from analyzed text · version I.

Summary

Caption: setbacks. Bill: no county minimums for lot size, width, depth or frontage on new roads.

The bill limits how Texas counties can control the layout of new subdivisions and buildings near roads. It touches county commissioners courts, developers and landowners, barring counties from setting density rules like minimum lot size, lot width and depth, and setbacks, and from setting lot frontage minimums on newly platted roads. Counties keep the power to set building lines along existing county and state roads, capped at 25 or 50 feet, but can no longer set setbacks from private roads or roads the county does not maintain.

Labels

Labels: STALLED AFTER COMMITTEE. Voted out of the House Land & Resource Management committee 5-2 on Apr 24, 2025. Taken up on the floor on May 7, 2025 and failed on May 13, 2025. The bill died.

Receipt

The receipt

89R-HB3892 · 2025-03-06

SOLD BY

+ 2 coauthors

ITEM

relating to county regulation of subdivision setbacks.

WHAT IT DOES

Caption: setbacks. Bill: no county minimums for lot size, width, depth or frontage on new roads.

The bill limits how Texas counties can control the layout of new subdivisions and buildings near roads. It touches county commissioners courts, developers and landowners, barring counties from setting density rules like minimum lot size, lot width and depth, and setbacks, and from setting lot frontage minimums on newly platted roads. Counties keep the power to set building lines along existing county and state roads, capped at 25 or 50 feet, but can no longer set setbacks from private roads or roads the county does not maintain.

CHARGES

[x] CAPTION MISMATCHanalysis confidence 50%

THE TEXT

“The commissioners court is prohibited from adopting minimum lot”…

Bill text, introduced version (I)

The caption speaks only of subdivision setbacks, but the body also bans county lot frontage minimums on new roads and lists minimum lot size, width and depth as off limits. The body cuts county power more widely than the caption says.

TOTAL

No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

LBB estimate · fiscal note version H · source

Sources

Fiscal note · version H · April 29, 2025

No first-year general revenue figure available here.

LBB published estimates · flow over the stated periods.

Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

HISTORY

  1. Filed
  2. Read first time
  3. Referred to Land & Resource Management
  4. Scheduled for public hearing on . . .
  5. Considered in public hearing
  6. Committee substitute considered in committee
  7. Testimony taken/registration(s) recorded in committee
  8. Reported favorably as substituted
  9. Comte report filed with Committee Coordinator
  10. Committee report distributed
  11. Committee report sent to Calendars
  12. Considered in Calendars
  13. Placed on General State Calendar
  14. Read 2nd time
  15. Postponed 5/8/25 2:00 PM
  16. Laid out as postponed business
  17. Postponed 5/9/25 3:00 PM
  18. Laid out as postponed business
  19. Postponed 5/10/25 3:00 PM
  20. Laid out as postponed business
  21. Postponed 5/12/25 2:00 PM
  22. Laid out as postponed business
  23. Point of order withdrawn Rule 8, Section 1(a)(1); Article III, Section 30
  24. Amended 1-Vasut, Harris Davila, Zwiener, Patterson, Luther, Troxclair, Noble, Gerdes, M. González, K. ...
  25. Record vote RV#2181
  26. Statement(s) of vote recorded in Journal
  27. Passed to engrossment as amended
  28. Record vote RV#2182
  29. Statement(s) of vote recorded in Journal
  30. Read 3rd time
  31. Postponed 5/13/25 11:40 AM
  32. Laid out as postponed business
  33. Failed to pass
  34. Record vote RV#2327
  35. Statement(s) of vote recorded in Journal
  36. 1 hr. notice-for reconsideration
  37. Vote reconsidered
  38. Failed to pass
  39. Record vote RV#2361
  40. Statement(s) of vote recorded in Journal
FILED UNDER

No verified beat found.

Smells

THANK YOU FOR CHECKING THE RECEIPT

CAMPAIGN PAID FOR BY

CAMPAIGN PAID FOR BY

Donors

Not tied to this bill.

Sources

The author's campaign account only. Own money and internal transfers are separate on the member page.

Derived itemized flow · Aug 30, 2024 to Apr 2, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Derived itemized contributions on live regular reports and uncovered special-session dates. Internal account transfers and daily reports are excluded.

Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC$303,416.00

Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC

$303,416.00

Cash
$77,500.00
Paid by others
$225,916.00
Total
$303,416.00
mail $151,916.00advertising $57,250.00polling $16,750.00

Also funds 124 other sitting lawmakers.

Derived recipient stock · Jul 10, 2024 to Oct 23, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

TEC account match.

Team
Sources

Derived itemized flow · Nov 14, 2024 to Mar 3, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Derived itemized contributions on live regular reports and uncovered special-session dates. Internal account transfers and daily reports are excluded.

Report IDs: 101012348, 101016762, 101032999, 101036177, 101041213, 101061435.

DUSTIN BURROWS CAMPAIGN$84,000.00

DUSTIN BURROWS CAMPAIGN

$84,000.00

Cash
$75,000.00
Paid by others
$9,000.00
Total
$84,000.00
polling $9,000.00

Also funds 39 other sitting lawmakers.

Derived recipient stock · Sep 13, 2025 to Sep 23, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Name match, not a verified identity: normalized filed name and state.

Team
Sources

Derived itemized flow · Dec 29, 2025 to Jan 27, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Derived itemized contributions on live regular reports and uncovered special-session dates. Internal account transfers and daily reports are excluded.

Report IDs: 101032999, 101036177, 101041213.

Texas Conservative Majority PAC$83,505.68

Texas Conservative Majority PAC

$83,505.68

Cash
$0.00
Paid by others
$83,505.68
Total
$83,505.68
canvassing $50,000.00Other filed descriptions $24,666.67polling $7,750.00texting $1,089.01

Also funds 42 other sitting lawmakers.

Derived recipient stock · Jan 23, 2026 to Oct 23, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

TEC account match.

Team
Sources

Derived itemized flow · Feb 9, 2026 to Mar 3, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Derived itemized contributions on live regular reports and uncovered special-session dates. Internal account transfers and daily reports are excluded.

Report IDs: 101041213, 101061435.

Money

Missing data does not establish zero giving. Display amounts are rounded.

×

Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC

$303,416.00

Cash
$77,500.00
Paid by others
$225,916.00
Total
$303,416.00
mail $151,916.00advertising $57,250.00polling $16,750.00

Also funds 124 other sitting lawmakers.

Derived recipient stock · Jul 10, 2024 to Oct 23, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

TEC account match.

Team
Sources

Derived itemized flow · Nov 14, 2024 to Mar 3, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Derived itemized contributions on live regular reports and uncovered special-session dates. Internal account transfers and daily reports are excluded.

Report IDs: 101012348, 101016762, 101032999, 101036177, 101041213, 101061435.

×

DUSTIN BURROWS CAMPAIGN

$84,000.00

Cash
$75,000.00
Paid by others
$9,000.00
Total
$84,000.00
polling $9,000.00

Also funds 39 other sitting lawmakers.

Derived recipient stock · Sep 13, 2025 to Sep 23, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Name match, not a verified identity: normalized filed name and state.

Team
Sources

Derived itemized flow · Dec 29, 2025 to Jan 27, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Derived itemized contributions on live regular reports and uncovered special-session dates. Internal account transfers and daily reports are excluded.

Report IDs: 101032999, 101036177, 101041213.

×

Texas Conservative Majority PAC

$83,505.68

Cash
$0.00
Paid by others
$83,505.68
Total
$83,505.68
canvassing $50,000.00Other filed descriptions $24,666.67polling $7,750.00texting $1,089.01

Also funds 42 other sitting lawmakers.

Derived recipient stock · Jan 23, 2026 to Oct 23, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

TEC account match.

Team
Sources

Derived itemized flow · Feb 9, 2026 to Mar 3, 2026. State data as of Nov 4, 2026.

Derived itemized contributions on live regular reports and uncovered special-session dates. Internal account transfers and daily reports are excluded.

Report IDs: 101041213, 101061435.

Votes4

House May 13, 2025

Yea
65
Nay
77
Present, not voting
2
Absent
2
Excused
4
Names

Named positions matched to lawmakers. See the journal for unmatched names.

House journal

Sources

Record 2361

HB 3892 failed to pass by (Record 2361): 65 Yeas, 77 Nays, 2 Present, not voting.

Published stock of positions for this vote, except where marked derived.

  • Yea: 65 (published)
  • Nay: 77 (published)
  • Present, not voting: 2 (published)
  • Absent: 2 (derived from named list)
  • Excused: 4 (derived from named list)

House journal. Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

House May 13, 2025

Yea
50
Nay
88
Present, not voting
2
Absent
5
Excused
5
Names

Named positions matched to lawmakers. See the journal for unmatched names.

House journal

Sources

Record 2327

HB 3892 failed to pass by (Record 2327): 50 Yeas, 88 Nays, 2 Present, not voting. (The vote was reconsidered later today, and HB 3892 failed to pass by Record No. 2361.)

Published stock of positions for this vote, except where marked derived.

  • Yea: 50 (published)
  • Nay: 88 (published)
  • Present, not voting: 2 (published)
  • Absent: 5 (derived from named list)
  • Excused: 5 (derived from named list)

House journal. Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

House May 12, 2025

Yea
80
Nay
54
Present, not voting
3
Absent
10
Excused
3
Names

Named positions matched to lawmakers. See the journal for unmatched names.

House journal

Sources

Record 2182

CSHB 3892, as amended, was passed to engrossment by (Record 2182): 80 Yeas, 54 Nays, 3 Present, not voting.

Published stock of positions for this vote, except where marked derived.

  • Yea: 80 (published)
  • Nay: 54 (published)
  • Present, not voting: 3 (published)
  • Absent: 10 (derived from named list)
  • Excused: 3 (derived from named list)

House journal. Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

House May 12, 2025

Yea
125
Nay
3
Present, not voting
3
Absent
16
Excused
3
Names

Named positions matched to lawmakers. See the journal for unmatched names.

House journal

Sources

Record 2181

Amendment No. 1 was adopted by (Record 2181): 125 Yeas, 3 Nays, 3 Present, not voting.

Published stock of positions for this vote, except where marked derived.

  • Yea: 125 (published)
  • Nay: 3 (published)
  • Present, not voting: 3 (published)
  • Absent: 16 (derived from named list)
  • Excused: 3 (derived from named list)

House journal. Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

Witnesses21
For
15
Against
5
On
1
Names

For

  • Greater Houston Builders Association, Texas Association of Builders1 registration
  • Schwartz, Page & Harding, LLP1 registration
  • Self4 registrations
  • Self; Cude Engineers1 registration
  • Self; Greater Houston Builders Association, Texas Association of Builders1 registration
  • Self; Greater houston builders association, texas association of builders1 registration
  • Self; Lennar1 registration
  • Texas Association of Builders1 registration
  • Texas Manufactured Housing Association1 registration
  • Texas Realtors1 registration
  • Tri Oak Dev1 registration
  • Winstead PC1 registration

Against

  • Bexar County Commissioners Court1 registration
  • County Judges and Commissioners Association of Texas1 registration
  • Director, Tarrant County Government Relations1 registration
  • El Paso County1 registration
  • Travis County Commissioners Court1 registration

On

  • Conference of Urban Counties1 registration
Sources

21 parsed registrations across the loaded witness lists.

Derived stock of witness registrations. Repeated appearances count separately. Organizations and self-representation appear as printed.

House witness list. Source snapshot 2026-10-20, Central time.

Fiscal

No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

LBB estimate · fiscal note version H · source

Sources

Fiscal note · version H · April 29, 2025

No first-year general revenue figure available here.

LBB published estimates · flow over the stated periods.

Source snapshot 2026-10-19, Central time.

How this was graded

Analysis of text version I by claude-opus-5-5, Oct 20, 2026, against the published rubric.

Sources

Texas House · Filed Mar 6, 2025

05/13/2025 H Failed to pass

Texas Legislature Online · Introduced · House Committee Report

Data snapshot Nov 1, 2026 at 1:53 PM CST. Grades, charges, quotes and corrections follow the published record.

Coauthors

House committee · Land & Resource Management · Committee vote 5 aye, 2 nay, 2 absent · Out of committee

Subjects

County Government--Land Use & Zoning

County Government--Roads

Text

The text as introduced · 535 words

By: Bell of Montgomery
H.B. No. 3892

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

relating to county regulation of subdivision setbacks.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1. Section 232.101(b), Local Government Code, is

amended to read as follows:

(b) Unless otherwise authorized by state law, a

commissioners court shall not regulate under this section:

(1) the use of any building or property for business,

industrial, residential, or other purposes;

(2) the bulk, height, placement, or number of

buildings constructed on a particular tract of land;

(3) the size of a building that can be constructed on a

particular tract of land, including without limitation and

restriction on the ratio of building floor space to the land square

footage;

(4) the number of residential units that can be built

per acre of land , including without limitation and restriction on

factors such as minimum lot size, minimum lot width and depth,

building setbacks and other measures that the county may impose to

limit the density of development ;

(5) a plat or subdivision in an adjoining county; or

(6) road access to a plat or subdivision in an

adjoining county.

SECTION 2. Section 232.103, Local Government Code, is

amended to read as follows:

Sec. 232.103. LOT FRONTAGES. By an order adopted and

entered in the minutes of the commissioners court and after a notice

is published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county,

the commissioners court may adopt reasonable standards for minimum

lot frontages on existing county roads and establish reasonable

standards for the lot frontages in relation to curves in the road.

The commissioners court is prohibited from adopting minimum lot

frontages on newly platted or created local public or private

roads.

SECTION 3. Section 232.104, Local Government Code, is

amended as to read follows:

Sec. 232.104. SET-BACKS. By an order adopted and entered in

the minutes of the commissioners court and after a notice is

published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, the

commissioners court may establish reasonable building and front

set-back lines for existing county and state roads as provided by

Chapter 233 without the limitation period provided by Section

233.004(c).

SECTION 4. Section 233.032, Local Government Code is

amended to read as follows:

Sec. 233.032. POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMISSIONERS COURT.

(a) If the commissioners court of a county determines that the

general welfare will be promoted, the court may:

(1) establish by order building or set-back lines on

the public roads, including major highways and existing roads, in

the county; and

(2) prohibit the location of a new building within

those building or set-back lines.

(b) A building or set-back line established under this

subchapter may not extend:

(1) more than 25 feet from the edge of the right-of-way

on all existing public roads other than major highways and roads; or

(2) more than 50 feet from the edge of the right-of-way

of major highways and roads.

(c) The commissioners court may designate the public roads

that are major highways and roads.

(d) The commissioners court may not establish set-backs

from private roads or roads not maintained by the county.

SECTION 5. This Act takes effect September 1, 2025.