{"id":734630,"date":"2026-04-17T14:45:37","date_gmt":"2026-04-17T14:45:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/734630\/"},"modified":"2026-04-17T14:45:37","modified_gmt":"2026-04-17T14:45:37","slug":"san-antonio-approves-zoning-changes-for-new-detention-facilities","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/734630\/","title":{"rendered":"San Antonio approves zoning changes for new detention facilities"},"content":{"rendered":"

San Antonio City Council on Thursday approved changes to the city\u2019s zoning and development codes aimed at regulating privately operated detention facilities, moving forward with an ordinance tied to a February resolution<\/a> that directed staff to explore how the city could respond to an uptick in federal immigration enforcement.<\/p>\n

The measure passed 9\u20132, with council members Marc Whyte (District 10) and Misty Spears (District 9) voting against it.<\/p>\n

The ordinance updates multiple sections of city code<\/a> \u2014 including building, fire and Unified Development Code<\/a> provisions \u2014 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.<\/p>\n

City officials have acknowledged the changes will not apply to the federally owned immigration detention facility<\/a> planned for San Antonio\u2019s 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.<\/p>\n

\"\"The Oakmont 410 industrial warehouse was recently purchased by the federal government, reportedly for use as an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center. Credit: Amber Esparza \/ San Antonio Report<\/p>\n

City officials confirmed there are no privately operated detention facilities currently operating within city limits, nor any proposals to build one.<\/p>\n

Even so, supporters said the ordinance is intended to shape how future privately operated detention facilities could be regulated.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is an incredibly simple concept. We are now requiring notification of a private entity that seeks to build, convert or operate a detention facility,\u201d District 2 Councilman Jalen McKee-Rodriguez said. \u201cIt would be foolish to think that just because there aren\u2019t any facilities now, that there won\u2019t be any in the future.\u201d<\/p>\n

Opponents questioned both the effectiveness of the ordinance and the basis for its claims.<\/p>\n

Whyte pressed city staff on whether a study was conducted to\u00a0support language in the ordinance<\/a> suggesting detention facilities could negatively affect economic development and surrounding communities.\u00a0<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

Whyte dismissed that explanation.<\/p>\n

\u201cAn academic journal can say whatever it wants,\u201d he said. \u201cThe facts on the ground are, we don\u2019t know of any of these private facilities that are within the city limits of San Antonio.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"District 10 Councilman Marc Whyte questioned the language in the ordinance suggesting detention facilities could negatively affect economic development and surrounding communities during a meeting on Thursday. Credit: Salgu Wissmath for the San Antonio Report<\/p>\n

Whyte also pointed to a 10\u20131 vote by the Zoning Commission recommending denial of the proposal, arguing the ordinance lacked merit.<\/p>\n

City staff, however, said that recommendation was not necessarily a rejection of the policy itself.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe discussion centered on this being a political decision that the council should make,\u201d Peterek said. \u201cSo that\u2019s how they ultimately got to the denial.\u201d<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis 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,\u201d she said. \u201cIn my mind, this is undermining what we can do as a local government.\u201d<\/p>\n

Provencio pushed back against those concerns.<\/p>\n

\u201cTo 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,\u201d she said.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"First Assistant City Attorney Elizabeth Provencio said the ordinance falls within the legal authority of the city. Credit: Diego Medel \/ San Antonio Report<\/p>\n

Supporters of the measure framed it as a zoning and land-use issue rather than an attempt to regulate immigration enforcement.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis 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,\u201d\u00a0 District 3 Councilwoman Phyllis Viagran said. \u201cWe are not saying no, we are saying you need to go into the community.\u201d<\/p>\n

District 5 Councilwoman Teri Castillo pushed back on claims the ordinance falls outside the city\u2019s authority, saying the changes are squarely within its role to regulate development.<\/p>\n

\u201cCity council in the city of San Antonio owns the \u2018lane\u2019 and paves the \u2018lane\u2019 through the Uniform Development Code and building and standards process,\u201d Castillo said.\u00a0<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

Jones pointed to feedback from local business leaders, including Brooks<\/a> CEO Leo Gonzales and San Antonio for Growth<\/a> on the Eastside\u2019s CEO James Nortey, who submitted letters expressing concern about the potential economic and community impact of detention facilities.<\/p>\n

\u201cTaken together, these amendments strengthen the city\u2019s ability to manage land use, safeguard community well being, and uphold transparency in government decision making,\u201d Nortey wrote in his letter of support. \u201cThey strike an appropriate balance between local regulatory oversight, the supremacy of federal law and the need to center the interest of San Antonio residents.\u201d<\/p>\n

With the ordinance approved, the city will implement the new notification and review requirements for privately operated detention facilities.<\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019m not normally a \u2018not in my backyard\u2019 person, but this is a zoning action that I think makes sense,\u201d Jones said.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"San Antonio City Council on Thursday approved changes to the city\u2019s zoning and development codes aimed at regulating…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":734631,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[5133],"tags":[5229,7230,5310,44279,9734,303523,7452,49945,17797,93912,175835,303524,49500,175327,95061,303525,23453,7202,303526,7203,49502,358,7453,3187,7815,303527,303528,67,586,132,5230,68,2969,20705,303529],"class_list":["post-734630","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-san-antonio","tag-america","tag-brooks","tag-city-council","tag-detention-facility","tag-east-side","tag-elizabeth-provencio","tag-gina-ortiz-jones","tag-immigration-detention-facility","tag-jalen-mckee-rodriguez","tag-james-nortey","tag-john-peterek","tag-leo-gonzales","tag-marc-whyte","tag-misty-spears","tag-phyllis-viagran","tag-private-detention-facilities","tag-sage","tag-san-antonio","tag-san-antonio-for-growth-on-the-eastside","tag-sanantonio","tag-teri-castillo","tag-texas","tag-top-story","tag-tx","tag-typedaily","tag-u-s-immigration-and-custom-enforcement","tag-unified-development-codes","tag-united-states","tag-united-states-of-america","tag-unitedstates","tag-unitedstatesofamerica","tag-us","tag-usa","tag-wc-750-1000","tag-zoning-commision"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"","error":"Validation failed: Text character limit of 500 exceeded"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/734630","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=734630"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/734630\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/734631"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=734630"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=734630"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=734630"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}