Councilmembers oppose local self-governance bill
The top two city officials oppose two bills that would curb local laws governing safety, the environment and discrimination, an idea that was supported by Sen. Drew Springer, who represents the Olney and planned to file similar legislation.
The Texas Legislature is considering bills that would curtail powers traditionally afforded home-rule cities, instead forcing them to abide by state regulations. The Republican bill sponsors say regulatory powers should be returned to the state so small businesses can operate under consistent regulations.
Mr. Springer told the Enterprise in December that he would introduce “The Texas Commerce Act,” whose purpose was to curb “a patchwork of differing local government ordinances, rules and regulations [that] has impaired the free flow of statewide commerce and has resulted in regulatory barriers and inefficient regulatory burdens of certain commercial activity conducted in more than one municipality.”
“Commerce is between the business and the individual and regulations on businesses should be standard statewide,” Mr. Springer said. “Some large cities have begun to pass liberal east coast union policies that not only affect businesses in their city but bleed over to affecting them at their locations across the state. We have statewide regulations on sexually explicit businesses and if other activities need to be regulated it should be done for the whole state.” But Olney Mayor Rue Rogers and Mayor Pro Tem Tom Parker said the bills would strip cities of local control, ceding to the state what is best decided at the local level.
“My opinion is this legislation is not in the best interest of Texas,” Mayor Rogers said. “Communities across the state know what is best for their community, not the politicians in Austin. Home-rule communities have the ability to self-govern and make decisions. This legislation would strip this privilege.”
“In my opinion, this is a slippery slope,” Mr. Parker said. “We already have many unfunded mandates that impose state control on things that should be determined at the local level. … let Texas be Texas and let the independence of local governance handle what the citizen wish to address.”
Unions represented by the AFL-CIO and other labor groups say the proposals could undo hard-fought measures to protect workers. “Under the current system, home-rule cities have the ability to do anything they’re not prohibited from doing. This would make them basically seek permission from the state to do anything,” Rick Levy, president of the AFL-CIO Texas branch said. As written, Levy said the bills also would affect non-discrimination ordinances - including those that cover gay, lesbian and trans people.
“To the extent that those differ at all from state law, or federal law, in terms of the clarity of their protections for lesbian and gay folks or anything that goes beyond that would be immediately pre-empted - so it’s a pretty draconian effort,” he said.
After Alaska, Texas is the second largest state geographically and Levy said he has always been impressed that lawmakers come together to represent such diverse interests. He does not believe they should dictate what elected officials in various cities are allowed to do.
“And just to kind of impose the will of a very small sector of the population on every community in the state - in their zeal to crush any kind of dissent or any kind of diversity they’re really stepping on what it means to be Texan,” he said.
The proposed legislation comes after Austin, known for its progressive policies, lost the ability to enforce a ban on plastic bags after it was challenged and the Texas Supreme Court ruled it violated state law.