Background
In 2018, the City of Fort Worth determined that short-term rentals (STRs) should be confined to certain designated areas of the city through its zoning ordinances. In 2023, the City added registration requirements for lawful STRs in those permitted areas. A coalition of over two dozen property owners—individuals, LLCs, and trusts operating STRs in single-family residential districts where such uses were never explicitly allowed—challenged the City’s zoning restrictions.
The property owners raised a battery of constitutional challenges, alleging violations of due process, equal protection, vested rights, and other constitutional provisions. They characterized the City’s enforcement scheme as an “Orwellian surveillance apparatus” deploying “neighborhood informants” and monitoring by city employees. They also brought ultra vires claims against city officials.
The trial court granted judgment largely in the City’s favor. The owners appealed all issues.
The Court’s Holding
The Second Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment in all respects except the ultra vires claim, which it vacated and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Justice Kerr’s comprehensive opinion addressed and rejected each of the property owners’ constitutional challenges.
The court held that Fort Worth’s zoning restrictions on STRs in residential districts were a valid exercise of the City’s police power under Texas law. STRs were never an explicitly permitted use in single-family residential districts under the City’s zoning ordinance, and the City’s decision to confine them to certain areas was rationally related to legitimate governmental interests including neighborhood character, safety, and residential quiet enjoyment.
The due process and equal protection claims failed because the zoning distinctions bore a rational relationship to legitimate government purposes. The vested-rights argument failed because the owners never acquired a legal right to operate STRs in districts where such use was not permitted. The court dismissed the ultra vires claims for lack of jurisdiction because the owners failed to show that city officials exceeded their statutory authority.
Key Takeaways
- Texas cities may restrict short-term rentals to designated zoning districts without violating property owners’ constitutional rights, so long as the restrictions bear a rational relationship to legitimate governmental interests.
- Property owners do not acquire vested rights to a particular use of property that was never explicitly authorized under applicable zoning ordinances—the absence of express prohibition does not create an affirmative right.
- Municipal enforcement of STR restrictions through registration requirements, complaint-driven investigation, and monitoring does not constitute an unconstitutional regulatory scheme.
- The decision provides a comprehensive roadmap for Texas cities seeking to regulate or restrict STRs within their zoning authority.
Why It Matters
This is one of the most comprehensive Texas appellate decisions on the power of municipalities to regulate short-term rentals through zoning—a topic of intense debate in cities across the state. The opinion gives Texas cities significant confidence that STR restrictions will survive constitutional challenge, while providing property owners a clear picture of the legal landscape.
For Texas real estate investors who have purchased properties for STR use, the decision underscores the importance of verifying that short-term rental use is affirmatively permitted under applicable zoning before acquiring property for that purpose. The ruling will be closely watched by other Texas cities considering similar STR restrictions and by property-rights advocates evaluating their appellate options.