Latest news with #Proposition
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- 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
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
SPS finishes two more school shelters, will use leftover funds for two new projects
SPRINGFIELD, Mo. — Springfield Public Schools (SPS) has finished building storm shelters in Holland and Cowden Elementary Schools. They are the final two of six school storm shelters built under Proposition 'S'. The other four schools are Pittman, Watkins, Wilder, and Mann. The shelters are mostly located in larger areas like gymnasiums, auditoriums or cafeterias. Proposition 'S' was approved in 2023, which authorized a $220-million bond towards the funding of the six shelters. According to Sean Dilday, the Executive Director of SPS, there is money left over, which will now be used towards two other projects, involving Bingham and Bissett elementaries. 'We'll be adding the two new projects. Bingham Elementary will be a tear down of the existing building. We'll build a new building, an elementary and then add a storm shelter to that location,' explains Dilday. 'Bissett will be a complete remodel of the existing building and we'll be adding a storm shelter as well to that building.' Dilday adds that the shelters will provide safety for students first and staff in the buildings during school, then to the community members after hours. In emergencies, however, they 'will never turn someone down' who needs help. The district currently has 20 different storm shelters. Locations can be found on the SPS website. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
New paid sick leave requirement targeted by Missouri Republicans
State Rep. Sherri Gallick, a Republican from Belton, speaks in April during Missouri House debate. (Tim Bommel/Missouri House Communications) Worries that 'slackers' may take advantage of Missouri's new law requiring most employers to give workers paid sick leave isn't a good enough reason to repeal it, a Democratic lawmaker said Wednesday. In November, voters overwhelmingly approved an initiative petition called Proposition A that requires employers with business receipts greater than $500,000 a year to provide at least one hour of paid leave for every 30 hours worked. Employers with fewer than 15 workers must allow workers to use at least 40 hours per year, with larger employers mandated to allow at least 56 hours. During a House committee hearing Wednesday, Democratic state Rep. Steve Butz of St. Louis challenged Republican state Rep. Sherri Gallick to back up her argument that employees can't be trusted to use paid sick leave only for the reasons allowed by the law. 'Under the mandated sick leave, potential abuse is nearly impossible to address,' Gallick, a Republican from Belton, told the House Commerce Committee. 'Employers cannot ask an employee why they were absent, leaving them vulnerable to lawsuits for merely inquiring.' Only workers employed under a fixed-term contract are exempt from Missouri's at-will employment rules. While the mandate created in Proposition A prohibits employers from firing workers who use the leave, Missouri law doesn't require employers to give any reason for discharging a worker. 'My hunch is, if you're a slacker, you've been calling in sick already, and this is an at-will state, and I've already fired you,' said Butz, who owns an insurance agency. Proposition A also increased the state minimum wage. It was set at $13.75 on Jan. 1 and will increase to $15 an hour on Jan. 1, 2026. After that, it will be adjusted for inflation, as it has been since 2007. Gallick is sponsoring a bill to repeal the paid leave law, delay the $15 minimum wage to 2028 and repeal the provision indexing it to inflation. Gallick's bill, as proposed, would have delayed implementation of the paid leave provisions from May 1 to Jan. 1. During the hearing, she presented a substitute with all the provisions she wants to enact. That change brought some questioning from fellow Republicans who wanted to know why she didn't include all the things she wanted in the bill when it was filed. 'Was this House committee substitute your original intent?' asked Rep. Don Mayhew, a Republican from Crocker. 'Yes,' Gallick replied. 'Then why didn't you just do that bill instead of this bill that changes a few dates?' Mayhew asked. Gallick said she filed it to get it in line for a hearing, then listened to businesses in her district to determine what was most important to them. 'That is why I kind of had a kind of a vague bill in the beginning,' Gallick said. Mayhew said he doesn't oppose some of the changes but wasn't pleased with the way it was delivered. 'I've never seen one to be this big of a difference between the filed bill and the House committee substitute,' Mayhew said. Gallick's bill is one of several being considered in the commerce committee that would alter the terms of Proposition A. There are bills to exempt employers with 50 or fewer workers from the new minimum wage, to limit application of the new minimum wage to workers 21 and older and to repeal the inflation adjustment. The campaign to pass Proposition A drew no large-scale opposition prior to the vote. But a court challenge filed in early December by major business advocacy groups asks the Missouri Supreme Court to invalidate the vote. The court has set the case for arguments on March 12. Many of the same groups involved with the lawsuit — Associated Industries of Missouri, the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Missouri Grocers Association and others — are backing the bills to change Proposition A. Ron Berry, a lobbyist for Jobs with Justice, said the challenges should have come earlier. 'When the petition is first certified for circulation, there's an opportunity to challenge that ballot summary. That didn't happen,' Berry said Wednesday. 'When the petition signatures are turned in and the initiative is certified for the ballot, there's an opportunity to challenge the signatures. That didn't happen. None of these challenges started coming until after the voters approved this by 57%.' Kara Corches, executive director of the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said businesses are worried about language barring employers from attempting 'to interfere with, restrain, or deny the exercise of, or the attempt to exercise, any right' to paid leave. The language creates a potential liability that has employers worried about 'trial attorneys getting rich off of their backs.' The paid leave mandate opens the door for other requirements, she said. 'This is a very slippery slope,' Corches said. 'Once we start on this, it's minimum wages, it's paid sick leave, what's next? Is it the dress code in your workplace? Is it the days that you're allowed to be closed?' Committee Chairman David Casteel, a Republican from High Ridge, said he intends to work through the week to develop a bill that both businesses and advocates defending Proposition A can accept. 'It has never been my intent to overturn the will of the people,' Casteel said. 'I just want to create a product that will be agreeable and compromised by both the employee and the employer.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
School board candidate Jennifer Kerns says she's ready to be heard
One of the six candidates is ready to go from 'sideline' to school board. After running for the St. Joseph School District Board of Education in 2023 and losing by 28 votes, Jennifer Kerns has some experience and is ready to get boots on the ground with her campaign. 'I've been on the sidelines for years doing the PTA stuff with the Parents and Teachers Association,' Kerns said. 'It's a big deal to have the parent engagement and to support our staff and teachers.' Kerns said serving on so many local boards and committees, such as the PTA, Project Graduation, InterServ and the Philanthropic Educational Organization, she understands community needs. 'I listen to all of them, I get to see what our community needs,' Kerns said. 'I get to hear what the teachers and the staff needs, and it's important that we support them and then the community as well.' Kerns said heading into the April 8 election that will see two people chosen for the school board, she has certain policies she wants to focus on. One is academics. 'You know, our scores are slowly getting better, but we're still under the state level that we need to be at,' Kerns said. 'We need to look at our academics, we need to look at what our teachers and staff needs to give our kids the best education because they go hand-in-hand.' Kerns also said teacher retention and recruitment, having additional classroom resources and community involvement are also something's she wants to advocate for. Kerns also said, one of her daughters has already gone through the District, and the other one is currently attending school in the SJSD- Showing Kerns is no stranger to the District. One big item candidates are sharing their opinions on ahead of the election, are the efforts to foster Proposition two- a bond initiative which would support the construction of two new high schools. 'However it's voted is up to the community now,' said Kerns. 'Whether they vote for, you know, the new high school or whether they don't vote for it, we've gotta move forward from there no matter what.' Whichever way the the bond issue is voted, Kerns said she's ready to 'get her hands dirty' when it comes to moving forward with the District's long-range plan. Regardless of how you vote, Kerns said it's important to make sure your voice is heard. 'If we want to see change, if we want to move forward, then you gotta go vote,' said Kerns. You can learn more about the candidates for the St. Joseph School Board every Tuesday through the end of March.
Yahoo
30-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bastrop City Council denies marijuana decriminalization amendment despite voter approval
The Bastrop City Council on Tuesday denied a city charter amendment to decriminalize possession of low amounts of marijuana, which was passed by 70% of voters in November. The marijuana amendment was the only one of the 11 voter-approved propositions the City Council denied. The council collectively approved the amendments, excluding Proposition M, in a 3–2 vote, with council members Cheryl Lee and Kerry Fossler voting against. Cannabis possession remains illegal at the state and federal level. If the City Council approved Proposition M, the charter amendment would have directed the Bastrop Police Department not to prosecute suspects possessing 4 ounces or less of marijuana. With a few exceptions for medicinal use, marijuana possession falls under the Texas Health and Safety Code. Having 2 ounces or less is a Class B misdemeanor and is punishable by up to 180 days in jail, up to $2,000 in fines, or both. Having 2,000 pounds or more is a first-degree felony with a minimum sentence of five years in prison and a $50,000 fine. Stanley O. Springerly, a senior associate attorney with the city attorney's firm, said state law supersedes language in a city charter. He recommended that the council not accept Proposition M to avoid legal action from the state. Last year, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued six cities — including Austin, San Marcos and Elgin — for their policies to decriminalize cannabis. Mayor Pro Tem John Kirkland said the city estimates $400,000 of legal fees to fight lawsuits if the city adopted the charter amendment. Lee said she voted against the motion to stay true to the voters who approved Proposition M. 'I would like (Proposition) M to be included in the approval of all the charter amendments because that's what the voters wanted,' Lee said. 'If the law provides an opportunity for residents to petition for something, and they follow that process, the end result is what it is.' Council Member Cynthia Meyer said denying the charter amendment was ultimately in the taxpayers' best interest. 'However we vote on this, nobody is against the voters. Looking forward, as our attorney said, there will be a lawsuit, and that means a lot of taxpayer money will be used. I think everybody up here is for the voters." Among the charter amendments that were approved by voters in November and by the City Council on Tuesday were paying the mayor $400 per month and council members $250 a month beginning with the next election cycle and requiring the council create a Charter Review Commission every six years. Among the charter amendments that were approved by voters in November and by the City Council on Tuesday were paying the mayor $400 per month and council members $250 a month beginning with the next election cycle, clarifying that the mayor appoints candidates to serve on boards with the council member reviewing and confirming those appointments, and requiring the council create a Charter Review Commission every six years. The City Council also approved three bird sculptures that will be placed along Chestnut Street. The sculptures are part of the second wave of the Bastrop Bird Junction Project, which will eventually include nine sculptures across the city. The council approved the installation of the first three sculptures in April. Michaela Joyce, the manager of the city's Main Street Program, said the city will unveil two statues at the intersection of Chestnut and Texas 95 in the next two months as part of the first phase of the project. She added that the city completed the installation of a pileated woodpecker sculpture at the Convention Center in August. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Bastrop City Council rejects marijuana decriminalization amendment
