City of San Antonio v. Greater San Antonio Builders Association and Indian Springs LTD., 419 S.W.3d 597

Chapter 245 governs vesting rights accrual and provides rights accrue on the filing of the original application or plan that fair notice of the project and permit sought.
Fair notice ordinance §35-410 (2006) requires a detailed fair notice form with permit applications to accrue Chapter 245 rights.
GSABA and Indian Springs filed a July 2006 declaratory judgment action challenging the ordinance as conflicting with Chapter 245.
The trial court denied City’s plea to the jurisdiction; the City appealed, and this Court previously affirmed that ruling.
Summary judgments held the fair notice ordinance substantively impaired vested rights and could not be harmonized with Chapter 245.
The court ultimately affirmed the declaratory judgment and awarded GSABA and Indian Springs attorney’s fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does the fair notice ordinance conflict with Chapter 245?	GSABA/Indian Springs: conflict exists; ordinance redefines vesting.	City: no conflict; ordinance furthers Chapter 245 goals.	Conflict established; ordinance invalid.
May the ordinance be severed to save valid parts?	N/A	Severance could preserve portions	Severance not applicable; challenge to entire ordinance.
Does 245.002(f) authorize redefining vesting accrual via the fair notice form?	N/A	245.002(f) does not authorize broad redefinition	No authority to redefine accrual; conflict remains.

City of Brookside Village v. Comeau, 633 S.W.2d 790 (Tex. 1982) (presumption of validity of ordinances; burden on challenger)
RCI Entm’t, Inc. v. City of San Antonio, 373 S.W.3d 589 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2012) (conflict with state statute where harmonization possible)
In re Sanchez, 81 S.W.3d 794 (Tex. 2002) (harmonization principle; otherwise statute prevails)
Harper Park Two, LP v. City of Austin, 359 S.W.3d 247 (Tex. App.—Austin 2011) (vested rights and regulatory changes framework)
Rogers Shavano Ranch, Ltd. v. City of San Antonio, 383 S.W.3d 234 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2012) (vested rights follow project; effect of 245 on regulations)
Dallas Merchants & Concessionaire’s Ass’n v. City of Dallas, 852 S.W.2d 489 (Tex. 1993) (preemption and conflict with state statute; harmonization)
Peacock v. Schroeder, 846 S.W.2d 905 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1993) (declaratory judgment fees reasonable for successful party)
Joe v. Two Thirty Nine Joint Venture, 145 S.W.3d 150 (Tex. 2004) (standard for reviewing traditional summary judgments)