‘District of Austin' bill voted down by Texas House committee
AUSTIN (KXAN) — House Bill 274, otherwise known as the 'District of Austin' bill, was voted down 11-0 by the House Committee on State Affairs
PAST COVERAGE | 'Throwing stones': Lawmaker behind District of Austin bill challenged in hearing
The bill, which was introduced March 19, would have stripped the city of Austin of its governing authority and turned it into the District of Austin. A similar bill was filed in 2022, but it was also voted down.
Rep. Briscoe Cain, R-Houston, who authored the bill, previously said HB 274 would help ensure Austin remained accountable to Texas by establishing a District of Austin as the official city of the state's government.
Cain cited the city's 'surging crime' as a reason for the bill; however, he did not cite a specific report for his claim about Austin's crime rates.
Previously, the city of Austin released a memo, opposing the bill and calling it 'vague' and lacking clarity on how the District of Austin would be governed. In a previous hearing, state lawmakers expressed similar concerns.
'Austin's Violent Crime Rate for 2024 is 59.6% lower than Houston, 43.8% lower than Lubbock, and 21.4% lower than San Antonio according to the Texas Department of Public Safety Uniform Crime Reporting System Crime in Texas Report Top 25 Violent Crime Comparison report,' the memo said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Texas Rep. Nicole Collier alleges "illegal confinement" by GOP
Rep. Nicole Collier, the Democratic state lawmaker who spent Monday night inside the Texas Capitol, is asking a court to let her exit the building, alleging she's facing "illegal restraint by the government" after she was told she needs a police escort to leave. The Fort Worth lawmaker and dozens of other Democrats left Texas earlier this month to delay a vote on a GOP-led plan to redraw the state's congressional map. The Democrats returned to Texas in recent days and they were given state police escorts to ensure they will show up when the state House convenes Wednesday, but Collier refused to sign a "permission slip" to be under escort by the Texas Department of Public Safety. Collier says she slept on the House floor overnight. Collier told CBS News' "The Takeout" on Tuesday that several other Democrats "tore up their permission slips" and will join her on the House floor Tuesday night. "I refuse to comply with this unreasonable, un-American and unnecessary request," Collier said. Meanwhile, in a habeas corpus application filed in Austin state court on Monday, lawyers for Collier alleged "illegal confinement." The petition says state Rep. Charlie Geren, a Republican who chairs the House Administration Committee, told Collier: "If you leave the Capitol you are subject to arrest." Collier's petition does not mention the state police escorts. Collier's attorneys argue that's illegal. They acknowledged that Texas law allows lawmakers who are absent from the Capitol to face civil arrest, but they say state officials have no legal right to detain legislators who are already present at the Capitol to ensure they don't leave. "The plain language is clear: a member may be compelled by the Sergeant-at-Arms to attend a legislative session if he or she is physically absent, but no such power is conferred on the Legislature to arrest or otherwise compel a member who is currently present (and not absent) to stay," the Democrat's court petition read. Collier, a seven-term lawmaker and former chair of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus, is asking a judge to order the House Sergeant-at-Arms to "immediately release" her, and to bar the Sergeant-at-Arms from "restraining Representative Collier in any respect." CBS News has reached out to Geren, House Speaker Dustin Burrows and the Texas Department of Public Safety for comment. The Texas House is set to reconvene on Wednesday at 10 a.m., when lawmakers are expected to move forward on a mid-decade redistricting effort that was pushed by President Trump. The new congressional maps could give Republicans a boost in next year's midterm elections, as the party aims to hold onto its narrow edge in the U.S. House. The plan was temporarily derailed earlier this month when dozens of Democratic members of the Texas House left the state in protest, denying House Republicans a quorum for the final two weeks of a special legislative session called by Gov. Greg Abbott to redraw the congressional maps. Republican officials threatened to seek Democrats' arrest or push from their removal from the legislature unless they returned to the state Capitol. Abbott called another special session starting Wednesday. Republicans are widely expected to pass the redistricting plan, given their decisive majorities in the state House and Senate. The plan has sparked nationwide recrimination from Democrats, with blue states like California and New York floating their own redistricting efforts. One plan in California could create five more Democratic-leaning seats, offsetting Texas's efforts. Texas Rep. Nicole Collier speaks out after being told she can't leave Capitol without police escort What's behind the latest FBI shakeup with Missouri AG set to join Bongino as co-deputy director Lead ACLU lawyer calls "Alligator Alcatraz," "unprecedented and not normal" Solve the daily Crossword
Epoch Times
5 hours ago
- Epoch Times
LIVE NOW: Texas Democrats Return to Texas
Texas Democrats return to spend the night on Aug. 19 in the Texas House in solidarity with Democratic state Rep. Nicole Collier, who has slept on the House floor the previous night after refusing a mandatory escort by the Texas Department of Public Safety.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Former Austin mayoral candidate sues over TRE ballot language
AUSTIN (KXAN) — A former Austin mayoral candidate is challenging the city over how it is presenting a tax rate election to voters in November. Last week, Austin City Council approved its budget for next fiscal year and set a property tax rate, which is high enough that it triggers a tax rate election, or TRE, in November. Council members also approved an ordinance ordering that special election to be held on Nov. 4. Austin signs off on $6B+ budget, triggering property tax rate election If voters approve the new tax rate, the average homeowner's property tax bill will go up by a total of $302.14 annually. The ordinance council members passed, ordering the TRE, lays out the rules of the election and what will appear on the ballot for voters. According to the ordinance, the TRE will be under Proposition Q on November's ballot, and it will say, 'this is a tax increase,' and describe what the money will go toward. However, Jeffery Bowen, a candidate in the 2024 Austin mayoral race, filed a lawsuit this week claiming that the ballot language as described in the ordinance doesn't make it clear that the property tax hike would be recurring, and that the ballot's description of what taxpayers would get out of the increase is not clear enough. Austin Mayor Kirk Watson, who defeated Bowen for the seat of city mayor last November, provided KXAN with the following statement: 'The City of Austin is confident the ballot language is appropriate and meets all legal requirements. We also have confidence in the court system and will respond in that venue.' The full lawsuit can be viewed below. Original Emergency Petition for Writ of Mandamus with App_1755530250Download According to the ordinance, the ballot will be prepared to permit voting 'FOR' or 'AGAINST' Proposition Q, which will state the following: CITY OF AUSTIN PROPOSITION QTHIS IS A TAX INCREASE Approving the ad valorem tax rate of $0.574017 per $100 valuation in the City of Austin for the current year, a rate that is $0.05 higher per $100 valuation than the voter-approval tax rate of the City of Austin, for the purpose of funding or expanding programs intended to increase housing affordability and reduce homelessness; improve parks and recreation facilities and services; enhance public health services and public safety; ensure financial stability; and provide for other general fund maintenance and operation expenditures included in the fiscal year 2025 -2026 budget as approved or amended by City Council. Last year, the ad valorem tax rate in the City of Austin was $0.4776 per $100 valuation. According to Bowen's lawsuit, Bowen hand-delivered a letter to the city council on Aug. 13 that outlined the deficiencies in the ballot language, and demanded that the council 'fulfill its nondiscretionary duty to adopt ballot language for the tax increase election that does not mislead voters about the tax increase proposition.' The lawsuit alleged that, 'instead, the Austin City Council prescribed its own ballot language for the tax increase proposition that will grossly mislead voters and promote its passage.' The first issue the lawsuit alleged was that city council violated Texas law that was set forth by the Texas Supreme Court in Dacus v. Parker (Tex. 2015) because the ballot language does not explain the 'purpose' of the tax increase in definite and clear terms. The lawsuit specifically pointed out the phrase of the ballot that states, 'and provide for other general fund maintenance and operation expenditures included in the fiscal year 2025-2026budget as approved or amended by City Council,' alleging that several parts of the phrase 'mislead' voters. It also said the ballot language fails to meet Dacus standards because 'several of the program descriptions are misleading for vagueness and non-neutral advocacy.' The other issue the lawsuit alleged was that the ballot is also too vague to establish an enforceable 'contract with the voters,' because it does not describe exactly how the current council and future councils could spend the money. The lawsuit said that because the tax increase would be a 'forever tax,' the ballot language should be 'definite and clear and become the foundation on which voters and taxpayers can rely—if the proposition passes—for how this huge tax increase will be spent, not only by this City Council but by all City Councils in the future.' Bowen's suit, which was filed in the Third Court of Appeals in Austin, asks the court to 'issue a writ of mandamus ordering and compelling the Mayor and City Council of the City of Austin to promptly hold a validly called meeting of the Council to adopt ballot language that corrects each the deficiencies in the Council-adopted ballot language noted above so as to have accurate language on the November 4, 2025 ballot.' In other words, Bowen is asking the court to force the mayor and city council to change the ballot language for the proposition. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
