Disaster Orders: Last month’s newsletter reported on a bill that would clarify the division of state and local powers during a pandemic. On March 11, a House committee held a hearing on H.B.3 (Burrows), known as the “Texas Pandemic Response Act.” Since then, however, no further action has been taken. That means the bill is likely dead, although its provisions could still be amended onto other legislation.
But another bill, H.B. 1656 (Murphy), is moving and would provide that a disaster order issued by the governor preempts and supersedes the order of a mayor or county judge.
“Defunding” the Police: Efforts to prohibit a city from reducing its police budget year-over-year continue. For example, H.B. 2438 (Meyer) would cap the property tax rate of a city that does so. In addition, S.B. 23 (Huffman) would require a city to hold an election prior to reducing law enforcement funding, with certain exceptions. Finally, H.B. 1900 (Goldman) may be a bill that “gets legs,” although that’s unclear at this time.
Disease Presumption: Since the pandemic began, the Pool has treated first-responder COVID-19 claims as presumption claims under the workers’ compensation law. S.B. 22 (Springer) and H.B. 541 (Patterson) would require that such claims be treated as such. A related bill, H.B. 2242 (Patterson), would require a city to pay a police officer or firefighter for leave taken due to a disease contracted while on duty, with some exceptions.
State Legislature Police Reform: Since the last newsletter, Congress hasn’t taken additional federal action on qualified immunity or similar law enforcement reform. At the Texas legislature,
H.B. 1089 (Reynolds) would create an additional state cause of action against a law enforcement officer and raise the current caps in the Tort Claims Act. Another bill, H.B. 88 (Thompson), would also create a state law cause of action. Both bills appear to be stalled in committee, however.
The Texas Legislature is now considering a bill to clarify the division of powers during a pandemic. On March 3, a committee of the Texas House of Representatives held a hearing on H.B.3, known as the “Texas Pandemic Response Act.”
Rather than amend the Texas Disaster Act, which is the current law authorizing the governor and mayors and county judges to act during other types of disasters, the bill creates an entirely new law relating only to pandemics.
Among many other things, the 19-page bill would:
- provide that any local order is void if it is inconsistent with the governor’s or Department of State Health Services’ actions.
- prohibit a political subdivision’s election officials from changing any voting procedures, unless they first obtain approval from the secretary of state.
- provide that, if a mayor requires the closure of a business during a pandemic, the city’s property tax revenue may be capped.
The bill would also allow the governor to “temporarily reassign resources, personnel, or functions of state agencies and political subdivisions for the purpose of performing or facilitating emergency services during a pandemic disaster.” The breadth of that power remains unclear.
The bill will soon move on to debate by the full Texas House, and the Pool – in coordination with the Texas Municipal League – will continue to monitor and provide input on it and similar disaster-related legislation.
Police Reform: A Quick Additional Update
Last month’s newsletter reported that some federal and state legislators want to change how police officers defend against claims of alleged misconduct. That defense is known as “qualified immunity (QI), which protects an officer from excessive force claims if his actions were reasonable considering court decisions governing similar situations.
Last summer, the U.S. House passed “The George Floyd Act,” which would limit the use of QI. The Act now appears to be bogged down in the Senate, with QI being the main sticking point.
Texas legislators have introduced similar legislation, which would ban chokeholds and require an officer to intervene if another officer uses excessive force. The legislation would also eliminate QI, but it appears to be in trouble as well.
While some legislators believe police officers should be more accountable for their actions, strong opposition from state leaders, police organizations, and others may mean the chances of wholesale changes to QI are slim.
The Pool will continue to monitor any legislative activity on police reform.