According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), SB 732 would have no significant fiscal implication to the State of Texas. The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA), the implementing agency, is expected to absorb any costs associated with enforcing the new requirements within its existing resources. This suggests that the administrative duties—such as adopting rules, overseeing compliance, and compiling the required legislative report—are not projected to demand additional funding or staffing.

Similarly, there are no significant fiscal implications anticipated for local governments. This is consistent with the bill's focus on private or nonprofit entities that develop low-income senior housing rather than local governmental housing authorities. The fiscal responsibility for compliance with the generator and temperature control mandates rests with these developers, not local or state agencies.

However, while the fiscal note finds no governmental budget impact, the bill could impose substantial private-sector costs. Developers of eligible housing developments will need to invest in compliant backup power systems, which may vary in cost depending on the size and design of the development. These capital investments are not directly reflected in the fiscal note because they do not affect government budgets, but they may influence developer behavior and housing affordability. Thus, while the bill is fiscally neutral from a governmental standpoint, it could have broader economic implications for housing providers and potentially for low-income senior tenants.

SB 732 aims to enhance resident safety in low-income multifamily housing for seniors by requiring the installation of backup power systems capable of operating critical infrastructure—namely elevators and climate control systems—during power outages. While the intent is clearly to protect vulnerable elderly residents, the bill's approach raises significant concerns regarding overregulation, property rights, and burdens on private enterprise.

The bill imposes a one-size-fits-all mandate on housing developments that receive Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, requiring installation of generators or other power sources regardless of the specific design, location, or risk profile of a given property. Although the Committee Substitute provides a more phased implementation timeline (with existing properties given until 2030 to comply), the legislation still represents a considerable financial burden on developers, especially in the absence of any state funding, grants, or tax incentives to offset these costs.

From a liberty-focused lens, SB 732 falls short of aligning with principles of limited government, free enterprise, and private property rights. The broad rulemaking authority granted to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs could also result in regulatory overreach without sufficient legislative oversight. Without amendments to implement narrower compliance requirements or allow for flexibility based on alternative safety solutions, the bill risks stifling development and increasing housing costs in an already strained affordable housing market.

For these reasons, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO while also considering the above-mentioned amendments to improve the bill to better balance resident safety with regulatory restraint and economic feasibility.

• Individual Liberty: The bill seeks to protect the health and mobility of elderly residents during emergencies by ensuring continued access to elevators and climate-controlled spaces. In this way, it can be seen as preserving the personal safety and dignity of individuals who might otherwise be trapped or endangered during a power outage. However, by mandating specific infrastructure solutions it may indirectly limit the choices available to individuals and developers in how housing is designed or managed.
• Personal Responsibility: This bill does not significantly engage with personal responsibility as a principle. The burden of compliance is placed on housing providers, not on individuals. While the bill arguably steps in where vulnerable populations may not be able to help themselves, it does not actively promote or diminish individual accountability.
• Free Enterprise: The bill imposes regulatory costs and infrastructure mandates on private and nonprofit developers participating in the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program. These new requirements could deter participation in the program, raise development costs, and reduce the financial viability of affordable senior housing projects. This undercuts the principle that economic actors should be free to operate without unnecessary government interference or mandates that distort market incentives.
• Private Property Rights: By requiring specific structural and operational features (e.g., backup generators and temperature-regulated spaces), the bill limits a property owner’s discretion in how their development is built and managed. Even with a delayed compliance timeline for existing buildings, this still constitutes a material government intrusion into the use and management of private property, particularly since there is no opt-out or exemption pathway for owners who may have alternative safety measures in place.
• Limited Government: The bill expands the regulatory role of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs by granting it rulemaking authority to enforce and implement the new mandates. It introduces a broad, permanent regulatory framework for a specific subset of housing developments without providing a sunset clause or a mechanism for legislative oversight over the agency’s rules. This represents an expansion of government authority into the private housing sector without a clear limiting principle.