‘Opening the Floodgates’: Dallas’ Prop S Could be Blocked by State With New Bill

A bill considered Monday by a state Senate committee could block the effects of Proposition S, the Dallas HERO-backed city charter amendment that voters approved in November. The ordinance makes it easier for residents to sue the city of Dallas for failing to enforce local or state ordinances. This threat has already been leveled several times since election day.

The bill’s author, Sen. Nathan Johnson, represents parts of Dallas, Mesquite, Irving and Grand Prairie. He told the committee that Senate Bill 2299 is necessary to help stymie the effects of Prop. S, which he said has “opened the floodgates to frivolous lawsuits.”

In SB 299, Johnson asks the Texas Legislature to codify governmental sovereign immunity — the legal protection that keeps government entities from being held liable for enacting laws or regulations — as a regulation granted by the state, rather than something municipalities can vote on through charter amendments like Prop. S.

“There are many people who believe that [Prop. S] is unconstitutional and illegal. I happen to be one of those people,” Johnson told the Senate’s Local Government Committee. “This could absolutely lock up city government. This Legislature needs to take the same action it has in other instances, and make it explicitly clear that [cities] cannot waive sovereign immunity.”

Dallas voters passed Prop. S with 55% of the vote. The entire Dallas City Council and Mayor Eric Johnson opposed the charter amendment.

SB 2299 was left pending in committee.

Support for SB 2299

Dallas City Council member Paula Blackmon and former Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings testified in favor of Johnson’s bill. Blackmon told the committee that since the passage of Prop. S, residents have threatened to sue the city over a litany of issues, stalling, in some cases, the city’s ability to make progress on a process or policy.

Since November, Dallas media outlets have written about various community organizations threatening to initiate lawsuits against the City of Dallas over encampment enforcement, termed-out board appointees and an understaffed police department. Blackmon added that within her East Dallas district, residents have threatened to sue Dallas over a proposed Conservation District expansion and the type of pesticides used at White Rock Lake.

“The people demand accountability, and they will no longer tolerate mismanagement, corruption, and lawlessness behind a legal shield. I urge you to kill this bill." - Dallas HERO Executive Director Damien LeVeck

tweet this

“I make every attempt, and I think my colleagues do too, to adhere to the laws. We don't want to break the law,” Blackmon said. “[When] people are on different sides [of an issue], and then they say, ‘Well, I'm going to sue you,’ it really [becomes] a different conversation. You don't look at, ‘Why don't you like this conservation district?’ It becomes, ‘Well then, now you need to talk to my attorneys.’”

Rawlings, who joined a coalition of Dallas’ former mayors and politicians to campaign against the propositions backed by Dallas HERO last November, told the committee he worries taxpayers will eventually be hurt by Prop. S if the ordinance is not blocked.

Dallas HERO has largely focused on police staffing as a cornerstone of their agenda. Prop. U, which passed alongside Prop. S in November, mandates hiring 900 additional officers to the Dallas Police force. Last month, Dallas HERO notified the city that if the police force continues to be understaffed, the city could face litigation.

However, Rawlings said his support for SB 2299 has “nothing to do with hiring police officers,” something he believes the “entire city” wants to achieve “as quickly as possible.” Instead, Rawlings warned that a side effect of waived governmental immunity will be the “chaotic” strain on city resources and the financial blowback lawsuits could cause for taxpayers. Already, Dallas’ credit outlook was changed to “negative” by Moody’s Investor Service after the passage of Prop. U.

“You play an important role here in the Senate by stepping in at times when municipalities do naive or stupid things. Today is another time for you to step in,” Rawlings said. “No business wants to move to any city that is constantly in court. The PR effect is damaging. Ultimately, policy will be determined by judges, not elected officials.”

Those Against SB 2299

Two individuals spoke in opposition to Johnson’s bill: Damien LeVeck, executive director of Dallas HERO; and Monty Bennett, publisher of the Dallas Express and a financier of the HERO initiative. Both men warned that blocking Prop. S on the state level would ultimately “undermine the will of the people” who voted for the amendment in November.

“You play an important role here in the Senate by stepping in at times when municipalities do naive or stupid things. Today is another time for you to step in." - Former Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings

tweet this

Bennett emphasized the need for Dallas to hire additional police officers to the committee, stating that if he were named city manager, he could “fill those open slots tomorrow morning.” He feels, however, that Dallas’ failure to bring the police force up to 4,000 officers is intentional.

“It's what I call the great con,” Bennett said. “They all say they're trying so hard, trying so hard, and they're not.”

Bennett added that, despite the “hysterics” displayed by those speaking in favor of Johnson’s bill, zero lawsuits have been filed against the city since Prop. S passed.

While Johnson warned the committee that Dallas is “just the first stop” for citizen-backed initiatives like waived immunity, LeVeck put a different spin on the sentiment. He lauded Dallas as a national leader for removing sovereign immunity, which “gives residents the power to hold their government accountable in court.”

“Dallas has suffered from failed leadership that has driven the city into the ground for the last 20 years,” LeVeck said. “The people demand accountability, and they will no longer tolerate mismanagement, corruption, and lawlessness behind a legal shield. I urge you to kill this bill. Respect the Constitution, respect local control, and most importantly, respect the will of the people.”