San Antonio City Council on Thursday approved changes to the city’s zoning and development codes aimed at regulating privately operated detention facilities, moving forward with an ordinance tied to a February resolution that directed staff to explore how the city could respond to an uptick in federal immigration enforcement.
The measure passed 9–2, with council members Marc Whyte (District 10) and Misty Spears (District 9) voting against it.
The ordinance updates multiple sections of city code — including building, fire and Unified Development Code provisions — to require notification and additional review for any private entity seeking to build, convert or operate a detention facility within city limits. It also establishes spacing requirements, including restrictions on how close such facilities can be to homes, schools and other community spaces, and requires city council approval through a specific use permit before a facility can operate.
City officials have acknowledged the changes will not apply to the federally owned immigration detention facility planned for San Antonio’s East Side. Under state and federal law, local zoning rules do not apply to federal property or facilities operated or leased by the federal government.
City officials confirmed there are no privately operated detention facilities currently operating within city limits, nor any proposals to build one.
Even so, supporters said the ordinance is intended to shape how future privately operated detention facilities could be regulated.
“This is an incredibly simple concept. We are now requiring notification of a private entity that seeks to build, convert or operate a detention facility,” District 2 Councilman Jalen McKee-Rodriguez said. “It would be foolish to think that just because there aren’t any facilities now, that there won’t be any in the future.”
Opponents questioned both the effectiveness of the ordinance and the basis for its claims.
Whyte pressed city staff on whether a study was conducted to support language in the ordinance suggesting detention facilities could negatively affect economic development and surrounding communities.
While city staff confirmed that no study had been commissioned, First Assistant City Attorney Elizabeth Provencio, said language in the ordinance was based on findings from studies in academic journals.
Whyte dismissed that explanation.
“An academic journal can say whatever it wants,” he said. “The facts on the ground are, we don’t know of any of these private facilities that are within the city limits of San Antonio.”
Whyte also pointed to a 10–1 vote by the Zoning Commission recommending denial of the proposal, arguing the ordinance lacked merit.
City staff, however, said that recommendation was not necessarily a rejection of the policy itself.
Assistant City Manager John Peterek said the commission ultimately viewed the issue as a political question not one to be decided by the zoning commission.
“The discussion centered on this being a political decision that the council should make,” Peterek said. “So that’s how they ultimately got to the denial.”
Spears raised separate concerns about whether the ordinance could expose the city to legal challenges or exceed its authority, particularly in areas governed by federal immigration law.
“This is just not in our lane. Under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, local governments do not have the power to veto or obstruct lawful federal actions,” she said. “In my mind, this is undermining what we can do as a local government.”
Provencio pushed back against those concerns.
“To be sure the record is clear that what is proposed before you today recognizes both the supremacy of state law and federal law and is within the purview of what the city is authorized to do,” she said.
Supporters of the measure framed it as a zoning and land-use issue rather than an attempt to regulate immigration enforcement.
“This is a decision that is supposed to be made here at the dais. It is not strictly about immigration. This is about our code and our zoning,” District 3 Councilwoman Phyllis Viagran said. “We are not saying no, we are saying you need to go into the community.”
District 5 Councilwoman Teri Castillo pushed back on claims the ordinance falls outside the city’s authority, saying the changes are squarely within its role to regulate development.
“City council in the city of San Antonio owns the ‘lane’ and paves the ‘lane’ through the Uniform Development Code and building and standards process,” Castillo said.
Mayor Gina Ortiz Jones said the ordinance is intended to give the city more visibility and oversight over where such facilities could be located in the future.
Jones pointed to feedback from local business leaders, including Brooks CEO Leo Gonzales and San Antonio for Growth on the Eastside’s CEO James Nortey, who submitted letters expressing concern about the potential economic and community impact of detention facilities.
“Taken together, these amendments strengthen the city’s ability to manage land use, safeguard community well being, and uphold transparency in government decision making,” Nortey wrote in his letter of support. “They strike an appropriate balance between local regulatory oversight, the supremacy of federal law and the need to center the interest of San Antonio residents.”
With the ordinance approved, the city will implement the new notification and review requirements for privately operated detention facilities.
“I’m not normally a ‘not in my backyard’ person, but this is a zoning action that I think makes sense,” Jones said.
