![]() 4 focus solely on city and county taxes and ignore the elephant in the room – school funding – means that no proposed cap can actually solve anything and would only continue to make cities an easy target in the future. So, six is at least a little better than four, right? Wrong. 1), replacing that bill’s four percent cap. ![]() Last Tuesday, the House Committee on Ways and Means substituted a six percent property tax revenue cap into the Senate’s revenue cap bill ( S.B. We hope that legislators realize this very real issue when considering annexation reform. ![]() 6 would create a great deal of uncertainty as to how cities can work with the military to keep our military bases viable. Nevertheless, bill supporters have gone to great length to marginalize their input about the negative consequences of their bills. Many other city and military officials have advocated that positon as well. Marine Corps Major General Juan Ayala (Retired) testified on behalf of the San Antonio Office of Military Affairs before both the Senate and House Committees about the detrimental effect annexation legislation could have on the military training missions in Texas. If cities can’t annex around bases to ensure compatible land uses, Texas bases may be unable to carry out their training missions, meaning they could be moved or closed. Development encroachment and land use compatibility is one of the most important factors in that process. The bases represent close to $150 billion a year economic impact to our state economy.īase realignment and closure ( BRAC) is the process by which the federal government reviews the efficiency of bases around the country. 6 by Donna Campbell (R – New Braunfels) could also affect the viability of the state’s military bases. League staff and city officials have long advocated that position to the legislature, and one component of it is particularly important.Īnnexation limitations like those in H.B. Legislation that would limit municipal annexation authority would negatively affect the Texas economy and the state’s ability to absorb so many new residents. Kirby Wilson and Marissa Evans contributed to this report.Download the full August 4, 2017, Number 30 (PDF). Abbott faces a Sunday deadline to veto any bill passed during the regular session, but his office said he was done after the 50 vetoes. ![]() "There's 1.8 million women who need publicly subsidized services, family planning in particular, and right now we're serving less than a quarter of those, so I think we have a long way to go," she said.Īll of Abbott's veto statements announced Thursday can be viewed here. Janet Realini, vice chair of the women's health advisory committee, said wrapping up the group was premature. "Rather than prolong government committees beyond their expiration date, the state should focus on programs that address more clearly identifiable needs, like my call for action to address the maternal mortality rate during the special session," Abbott said. One of them, House Bill 2410, would have allowed for mail-in-ballot-only elections under specific circumstances in small counties - Abbott said mail-in ballot fraud is too serious of a problem to risk it.Īnother measure he vetoed Thursday was Senate Bill 790, which would have kept in operation an advisory group that makes recommendations to the state on its women's health services.Ībbott said in his veto statement that SB 790 "does nothing more than extend the expiration date of a governmental committee that has already successfully completed its mission." In at least two instances, Abbott vetoed bills on the same topics that he has asked lawmakers to address in a special session starting July 18. The legislation deals with the licensing for certain electrical workers. He vetoed at least five bills for the same reason: The House bill's author asked for a veto because he prefers the Senate companion.Ībbott vetoed one measure, House Bill 1284, because, in his telling, the legislation was the "exact same bill" that he vetoed in 2015. That's several more than he vetoed following the last session and the most a governor has doled out since 2007.Ībbott offered a number of common explanations for his vetoes, calling the bills unnecessary, too costly or too burdensome. Greg Abbott has vetoed 50 bills that were passed during the regular legislative session, his office announced Thursday. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |