Citizen Portal
Sign In

Fort Worth council pauses proposed residency restrictions after legal warnings and public outcry

Fort Worth City Council · February 10, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After hours of public comment and legal testimony, the City Council voted to continue consideration of a proposed ordinance that would expand residency restrictions for certain registrants, citing constitutional concerns and requests for further legal review.

The Fort Worth City Council voted to continue consideration of a proposed offender-residency restriction ordinance after attorneys and community members raised legal and practical concerns.

Attorney Richard Gladden told the council the draft ordinance contained at least two legal defects, saying it “would be invalid under article 11, section 5a of the Texas constitution” because district judges have authority to determine probationers’ residences and because parole residency decisions are controlled by the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles. He said he delivered a certified notice of claim to the city. Several public commenters, including treatment providers and housing operators, argued residency restrictions can destabilize people who are supervised and undermine rather than enhance public safety. Sean Braun, who identified himself as a licensed offender-treatment provider, told the council that recidivism for the group cited in the ordinance “ranges anywhere from about 13 to 14 percent,” and urged alternatives such as treatment, supervision and housing supports.

Council Member Beck moved to continue the item so legal staff could vet the issues raised; a substitute motion to raise certain distance limits failed for lack of a second. The motion to continue carried, and the ordinance will return after additional legal review and potential redrafting to address constitutional and statutory conflicts.

Why it matters: Supporters of stricter residency limits say the regulations reduce opportunities for registrants to be near places children gather. Opponents, including attorneys and service providers, say the measure may conflict with state authority over probation and parole and could make people harder to supervise, making communities less safe.

What to watch next: The council directed staff to return the item at a future meeting with legal analysis and possible amendments. The continued debate will determine whether the council sends a revised ordinance back for another hearing or votes to table or withdraw the proposal.