|
News you can use |
Legislative Activity Judge Affirms TAC’s Constitutional RightsA district judge has confirmed TAC’s constitutional right to work with county officials and lawmakers to influence legislation that affects county government. Williamson County Judge Ken Anderson issued an injunction Oct. 18 declaring that the statute that authorizes TAC to collect dues from counties does not prohibit the organization from using non-dues revenue to actively represent county interests at the Capitol. Anderson agreed, however, with the Williamson County residents who had filed the lawsuit to prohibit TAC from using the organization’s dues for some of those purposes. The net effect is that if TAC does not collect dues or if its dues monies are segregated from its other revenues, TAC may use other income to fund efforts to protect counties from unfunded mandates, arbitrary fiscal restraints or other legislative actions that could adversely affect county service delivery. “This ruling actually declares for the first time TAC’s legal authority to influence pending legislation with non-dues revenue to protect county interests, without the restrictions of the statute that authorizes counties to pay dues,” TAC General Counsel Robert Lemens said. Two paid staff members of the anti-government Americans for Prosperity organization joined with another Williamson County citizen in June 2005 to sue Williamson County for allegedly violating the statute that authorized the payment by counties of dues to TAC. Filing the suit were AFP State Director Peggy Venable and staff member Jan Brauner, along with fellow Williamson County resident Judy Morris. The trio originally sued Williamson County to prevent it from paying dues to TAC on grounds that the authorizing stat- Legislative Activity Judge Affirms TAC’s Constitutional Rights ute provides that counties may pay dues to a state association of counties only if “neither the association or an employee of the association directly or indirectly influences or attempts to influence the outcome of any legislation pending before the Legislature ….” (conveniently omitting the rest of the sentence that authorizes TAC to provide information for legislators on request). TAC was later added as a defendant in the suit. Prior to the trial in November 2006, attorneys for both sides of the case acknowledged that TAC has engaged in a number of actions that communicate to county officials about the positive or negative effects of pending legislation and has urged officials to take positions for or against specific bills. The stipulated facts agreed to by both parties also stated that TAC does not contribute to legislators’ campaigns, participate in lobby-sponsored events such as golf tournaments or provide “lavish entertainment, food or other benefits to legislators.” In an initial opinion issued on Jan. 5 of this year, Judge Anderson agreed with the plaintiffs’ contention that the statute restricts use of dues money to finance TAC’s legislative efforts. TAC’s attorney, Robert Heath, had urged the court to examine the history of state regulation of lobbying by public entities as it existed in 1969, when the TAC statute was passed. The language in the TAC law, he noted, was almost identical to legislative “rider” language that was (and still is) routinely inserted in state appropriations bills, providing that state funds shall not be used for “influencing the outcome of any election, or the passage or defeat of any legislative measure.” Many state agencies employ staff with specific responsibility to advocate for their agencies’ budgets as well as encourage or discourage bills that affect their operations. Anderson did not buy that argument but in issuing his injunction this October, the judge apparently agreed with Heath’s assertions that several U.S. Supreme Court precedents provide that the government may not unduly restrict First Amendment rights of organizations that receive public funding, provided the actions are paid for by other funds. “TAC may constitutionally be prohibited from using dues revenue to influence legislation,” the injunction stated. “So long, however, as dues revenue is segregated and used exclusively for activities that are unrelated to attempts to influence the passage or defeat of legislation and those activities are otherwise lawful, the Texas Association of Counties cannot constitutionally be prohibited from attempting to influence the passage or defeat of legislation.” In addition, Anderson ruled “(T)he injunction does not affect the rights of individual counties or individual elected or appointed officials or county employees from, in any manner otherwise allowed by law, expressing their opinions on legislative matters.” Finally the injunction tracks state law in providing that TAC employees are not “prevented from providing information for a member of the Legislature or appearing before a legislative committee at the request of the committee or the member of the Legislature”, no matter whether the employees are paid with dues or other funds. After Judge Anderson issued his initial opinion in January, the TAC Board of Directors voted to not collect dues during the current calendar year. The matter of future dues collection will be considered by the TAC Board in December. As this magazine was being printed, it was not known whether either party in the lawsuit would appeal the ruling.
Ellis County to Host Communications Workshop for CountiesThe National Association of County Information Officers will be holding its Winter Workshop on Dec. 4 and 5 at Waxahachie’s Hampton Inn hotel in Ellis County. NACIO is the communications-focused affiliate of the National Association of Counties. Discussion sessions will offer insights on grant writing, two-way communications with the public, using video on county Web sites, talking to the media, dangerous weather communications and delivering on the expectations residents have of their counties. The two-day seminar was largely organized by Ellis County Communications Director Diana Buckley, who also serves as NACIO’s Region III director. “If you ever find yourself staring down a reporter’s microphone or trying to get the media to notice your press releases — if you are in any way involved in conveying a message to the public — there’s something here for you to learn, and someone here who can learn from you,” Buckley said. The workshop’s featured speaker is Jeff Crilley, author of How to get Free Publicity, which covers how to write press releases, gain coverage of news events and combat negative press coverage. Crilley, an Emmy-winning news broadcaster from Dallas, has also appeared on national news and television programs such as CNN, FOX News, the Discovery Channel, Good Morning America and the CBS Early Show. Crilley has been the recipient of the National Headliners Award, the Edward R. Murrow Award and the Thurgood Marshall Award. In 2004, the Texas Associated Press named him “Best TV Reporter in the State.” Other speakers will include:
“One of the really great things is the roundtable discussion on the second day of the conference,” said NACIO President Jane LeMaster, the administration division director for the Gwinnett County Department of Transportation in Georgia. “That’s going to be a great opportunity for people to really put their heads together and discuss problems and ideas.” The workshop is open to communications- related professionals and county officials from around the country. The registration fee for NACIO members is $100; non-members pay $125. Online registration is available at www.nacio.org/events.html. Technology Conference Offers Specialized InstructionTAC’s Courts and Local Government Conference (CoLoGo) is all grown up. TAC, along with several affiliate county organizations, developed the specialized annual conference five years ago as a way to encourage the use and exploration of innovative technology. In order to give itself legs, CoLoGo partnered with the long-standing national Government Technology Conference (GTC), which holds its annual southwest meeting in Austin each year and offered to provide TAC space next to its own seminars and sessions. Over the years and with GTC’s assistance, the TAC technology conference grew to the point that, for the first time, it will be its own independent conference. As a bonus, the two conferences will still run concurrently, from Jan. 29-31 in Austin. TAC conference attendees will have the opportunity to visit the GTC trade show, which will be held in the Austin Convention Center. The TAC conference will be held in Austin’s Crowne Plaza. The new meeting space will accommodate a larger vendor show and more specialized breakout sessions. “We now have sleeping rooms, meeting rooms and vendor space all under one roof,” said TAC Education Director Jay Johnson. Sessions will address both proven and new technologies for courts Technology Conference Offers Specialized Instruction and local government, as well as how to establish and implement usage policies for government-owned technology, including notebooks, phones, PDAs and internet access. The conference will also include separate tracks with office-specific technology for county judges, IT managers, justices of the peace, municipal courts and county offices. General Sessions intended for all attendees will feature best practices in technology and uncover new technological innovation. The conference will offer continuing-education credit for county judges, commissioners, county tax assessor-collectors, county auditors and CPAs, county and district clerks, county treasurers and county judges. Early-bird registration for the conference is $150 until Jan. 1. For more information, see pages 42-43 or contact the TAC Education Department at 800-456-5974. Online registration is also available via the Education Center at the TAC Web site, www.county.org. The TAC technology conference is cosponsored by the Texas Municipal Courts Education Center, the Texas Center for the Judiciary, the Texas Justice Court Training Center, the Judicial Committee on Information Technology, the Texas Judicial Academy and the Texas Association of Governmental Informational Technology Managers.
Rio Grande Judges Tell Feds: Instead of Fence, Fix the LeveesTwo county judges are gaining attention for their opposition to the federally mandated border fence, as well as to their own locally driven solution: beefing up and building on the Rio Grande levees. Improving the levees and doing away with the border fence is a win-win, said Cameron County Judge Carlos Cascos and Hidalgo County Judge J.D. Salinas, who have been working on behalf of their taxpayers to get the federal government’s attention and support of the issue. Cascos believes federal dollars now set aside for a border fence aimed solely at increasing border security would be better spent repairing and improving the area’s neglected levees and building a retaining wall to support the levee system. The idea is that the retaining wall would not only act as an additional barrier for those crossing illegally but would also improve the area’s flood protection and give law-enforcement agencies a better perch from which to monitor the border. “Instead of building a wall that I don’t believe is going to work, why don’t we look into reinforcing the Rio Grande levee system?” Cascos said in an interview with County, adding that it’s a question he pretty much asks everyone nowadays. “My concept is the building of a retaining wall along the levee system that we have now, and taking it to go 15 or 18 feet up. That’s the approach I’m preaching, and I think people are listening,” he said. “From the Mexican side, you would see a retaining wall that comes up from the Rio Grande water level, 14 feet, whatever it is. But on the American side, you don’t see a wall. You can build a gravel road on top of the levee and use it to give border patrol clear sight of the other side.” Cascos said he took the concept to the International Boundary and Water Commission, which provides binational solutions to issues between the United States and Mexico. IBWC Commissioner Carlos Marin even drew a sketch of the concept, though instead of a high concrete retaining wall, it showed a retaining wall with a fence placed on top. The idea itself may not be perfect and has yet to be put into writing or studied officially. But Cascos believes it is important that the federal government halt construction of a border fence until the levees are fixed. He asked the federal government for a moratorium on the construction of the border fence until alternative solutions have been studied and evaluated. As of press time, there was no word on whether such a moratorium would be granted, though U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, who took a tour of the Valley’s levee system, has reportedly said he would work to ensure the idea would be more broadly investigated. “(I’ve heard) interesting ideas of how to maximize the effectiveness of taxpayer dollars … and we can hopefully engage in something that will provide the security measures, but also flood control — if we can find some way to combine all those things that make sense,” Cornyn said during a private meeting of local and federal officials, as quoted by the The Monitor newspaper in McAllen. The Rio Grande Valley levees are in bad shape. They are eroded, poorly maintained and flattened. Some are not wide enough to drive over while others are covered in weeds and blend into the surrounding land. The condition of the levees leaves the Lower Rio Grande region especially vulnerable to flooding since they would be easily breached by a mid-sized hurricane. Some residents in the area still remember Hurricane Beulah, which in 1967 caused much of the land along the Rio Grande to flood. Back then, the land was agricultural, but much of it has since been developed. Despite what happened with the New Orleans levees during Hurricane Katrina, Congress failed to allocate the money necessary to repair the Rio Grande levees. Instead, voters in the Hidalgo County Drainage District No. 1 approved a $100-million bond referendum in November, $28 million of which is now allocated for levee repairs, but only along a 12-mile stretch. Fixing the levees the way Cascos envisions could cost around $200 or $250 million — though that is in no way an official estimate — while the cost of building the border fence along the Rio Grande is estimated at $3.3 million per mile. The federal government has plans to build a fence along 700 miles of the 2,100- mile U.S.-Mexico border, though funding is still in question and may keep the fence from being built as legislated. According to the 2006 Secure Fence Act, 370 miles of physical double-chain-link and barbed-wire fence are planned, while other parts are either designed as “vehicle barriers” — such as concrete blocks — and “virtual fences,” utilizing a high-tech combination of sensors, radars and cameras. In Texas, The Secure Fence Act placed some type of border fencing from five miles north of Del Rio to five miles southeast of Eagle Pass and from 15 miles west of Laredo to Brownsville, all the way along the Rio Grande Valley region. The Act prioritized the 70-mile Rio Grande fence — which affects Cameron and Hidalgo counties — requiring that it be completed by Dec. 31, 2008. However, lawmakers also passed a separate piece of legislation giving flexibility to both the Bush administration and the Department of Homeland Security and promising that local leaders would have an opportunity for input as to what kind of border fence would be built in their areas. The Department of Homeland Security closed the public-commenting period regarding the Rio Grande border fence on Oct. 15. DHS spokesman Russ Knocke has said that portion of the border fence will be “traditional” rather than virtual, but it’s also expected to be non-continuous. A draft map of the fence showed 21 different segments. The border fence is controversial, with some saying it’s not enough to keep illegal immigrants out and others saying it’s too much and will negatively impact U.S.-Mexico relations and southern economies. Rio Grande officials are nearly united in their sentiment that a physical fence would be bad for the area, since it would cut off residents from the Rio Grande River and impact the area’s unique environmental features and animal species. “There is not a single idea that is going to prevent people from crossing the border. If people want to cross, they are going to cross. If we build a 20-foot wall, someone is going to bring a 21-foot ladder. I’m looking at it from an expenditure side. To me, it’s a waste of money,” Cascos said, adding that a retaining wall, because it sits in water, is harder to breach than a fence. “And if we do get hit by a major storm, those levees are going to be breached.” Both Cascos and Salinas have actively promoted the idea of using a retaining wall supporting the levee system as a border fence. “As a strong supporter of our local efforts to upgrade this area’s deteriorating levees, we would like to ask that you help us champion the idea that a federal investment in our levees is a more practical solution when compared to spending millions to build walls along several of our border communities,” Salinas wrote in a letter to the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security. “I firmly believe that repairing the levees serves two very important purposes: they can support homeland security efforts to increase enforcement along the border and they also should protect our residents and infrastructure from a natural disaster.” The Secure Fence Act also authorized either virtual, vehicular or actual fencing in Tecate, Calif., and from Calexico, Calif., to Douglas, Ariz. — which covers almost all of the Arizona-Mexico border — and from Columbus, New Mexico to El Paso. As of Oct. 1, construction was complete on 145 miles of new fencing and 114 miles of vehicular fencing. Texas Homeland Security Conference Set for San Antonio Dec. 3-7 The 2007 Texas Homeland Security Conference will be held Dec. 3–7 at the Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center in San Antonio. The conference is sponsored by the Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and the Governor’s Division of Emergency Management. Conference participants will include professionals from the full spectrum of organizations and agencies that exemplify Texas homeland security goals: prevention, protection, response and recovery. The conference brings together representatives of law enforcement, border security and port security, transportation and cyber security, as well as firefighters, emergency medical personnel, Texas Military Forces, voluntary organizations and private sector representatives. Attendees also will include officials from higher education, public education, health and medical care and public officials from the local, state and national governments. Representatives of more than 30 state agencies on the Governor’s Emergency Management Council and federal officials also will attend. More information on the 2007 Texas Homeland Security Conference can be found at the GDEM Web site. TAC Management Institute to Include Infrastructure Track The August collapse of an Interstate 35 bridge in Minneapolis that killed 13 and the October sinkhole in San Diego that damaged nine homes have brought infrastructure to the forefront of the nation’s consciousness. In response, the 2008 TAC County Management Institute will add a special track for commissioners and county engineers to focus on infrastructure planning, in addition to the conference’s traditional emphasis on general management skills. The May 14-16 event will also include sessions on health benefits, human resource management and risk management. Attendees can expect to return to their counties with better supervisory skills, new team building techniques, and cost-saving risk management, health care and unemployment tools. The Institute will also include a presentation by keynote speaker Donna Zajonc. Zajonc is the cofounder of the Bainbridge Leadership Center in Washington, which specializes in innovative leadership training. Zajonc is a three-time Oregon legislator and author of the 2004 book The Politics of Hope: Reviving the Dream of Democracy. The 2008 TAC County Management Institute will be held at the Doubletree Hotel on I-35 in North Austin. For more information, contact the TAC Education Department at 800-456-5974 or visit the Education Center at www.county.org to register online. County Officials Asked to Weigh in on U.S. Presidential ElectionMore than 400 county officials from around the country have endorsed a United States Presidential candidate through the National Association of Counties’ 2008 Presidential Election Project. “We want to know who you’re supporting in the race and why you’re supporting them,” states a short five-question survey found online at www.naco.org/presidential. The survey’s findings are periodically added to the NACo 2008 Election Project Blog at www.nacoblog.blogspot.com. As of Nov. 7, county official endorsements were dispersed, led by former New York Gov. Rudy Giuliani with Sen. John McCain and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney still having a shot for the Republican nomination. On the Democratic side of the field, Sen. Hillary Clinton was leading the way, with former Sen. John Edwards close behind her. Edwards received more than twice as many votes as Sen. Barack Obama. Other candidates include Democrats Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich and Republicans Sam Brownback, Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo. The purpose of the Presidential Election Project is to promote the county message to U.S. Presidential candidates and get them thinking about restoring local-federal government connections. According to the project’s announcement, “hearing the same message from county officials will encourage the candidates to focus on these issues as part of their campaigns.” As part of the project, NACo sent a county issues survey to the candidates, asking them to respond negatively or favorably to questions regarding unfunded mandates, County Officials Asked to Weigh in on U.S. Presidential Election tax relief for rural health professionals, reauthorization of Workforce Investment Act legislation, federal programs for rural economic development, full funding for the Community Development Block Grant program and increased federal highway funding. NACo received five surveys back in response, all from Democrats: Biden, Dodd, Edwards, Gravel and Obama. Republican front runners Giuliani and Romney also responded, but only to say it was against their campaign policies to respond to questionnaires. For the most part, the five candidates answered all questions favorably. However, when asked “Do you support elimination of unfunded mandates and preemptions of county authority imposed by presidential administrations and Congress?” only Dodds and Edwards agreed. Biden and Obama both said they sympathize with counties, but wrote statements implying that unfunded mandates cannot be completely eliminated. “As a former member of a county council, I particularly understand the issues that county governments face trying to support and grow their communities. I recognize that unfunded mandates can be a tremendous burden. I support increased funding to state and local governments to help them implement local, social and federal programs,” Biden said. “I do not support imposing unfunded mandates on states and localities. And I strongly support providing necessary funding for programs such as No Child Left Behind. However, rather than repeal important programs, I believe we must work to provide adequate resources,” Obama said. The other controversial question was one regarding whether candidates support repealing a law that will require some counties to withhold federal taxes on payments for services and products beginning in 2011, with no minimum transaction. While Dodd, Gravel and Obama stated that they would support such a repeal, Edwards said he had no position on the idea and Biden said he disagreed. “As a former county official, I understand the serious constraints that county governments operate under. If there is a revenueneutral option, I would consider supporting the repeal,” Biden said. Dodd answered all of NACo’s questions affirmatively, but only after editing some of the questions. For instance, he changed the question “Do you support additional funding for Medicaid so that county property taxpayers are not burdened with paying for the program as they are in New Hampshire, New York and many other states?” and left it at “Do you support additional funding for Medicaid?” crossing the rest out. The NACo blog also includes health care statements and plans from various candidates, including Biden, Brownback, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Huckabee, Kucinich, Obama, Paul, Richardson and Tancredo. Vote Counts Endorsements by County Official (as of Nov. 7) Republican:
Democrat:
HEBP Health Risk Assessment Gives Glimpse at Member WellnessA Health Risk Assessment conducted by TAC during a Professional Partners in Pooling workshop earlier this year shed light on ways members can work to improve their health and well-being, as well as on the healthy habits members have already taken to heart. The HRA included information on 62 participants. Wellness scores of lower than 80 indicated “an elevated likelihood that individuals will develop certain medical conditions,” states the report. The good news:
The overall wellness score for cancer was 60, according to the HRA, with 6.5 percent of the respondents already having been directly affected by cancer. That score took into account members’ uncontrollable factors such as family history, age, race and sex, as well as the controllable factors of weight, nutrition and tobacco use. Members’ responses regarding tobacco use were largely ideal, but improvements could be made through nutritional or weight changes. Surveyed members had a blood pressure wellness score of 56. About 70 percent were borderline or high-risk for developing blood pressurerelated illnesses such as heart attacks, strokes, heart failure or kidney pressure. Fortunately, blood pressure is affected by controllable lifestyle factors, such as a person’s diet, alcohol use, exercise and tobacco use. In the area of physical activity, in which the surveyed members received a wellness score of 55, 42 percent of participants said they exercise one day a week or less. Only three participants said they exercised almost daily. Out of 54 responses, 40 had “fair” or “tops” body mass index and only one had a significant weight problem, though 13 received “poor” marks. But the assessment also included questions relating to members’ willingness to improve their physical activity levels; nobody responded that they had no desire to change their behavior. Thirty percent had already made positive steps toward increasing their physical activity and were maintaining that activity while 44 percent said they were making plans to change their physical activity behaviors. Nutrition is another area that could be improved. Surveyed members received a wellness score of 51, with more than half of the participants receiving “poor” marks. The report suggests members should eat more fruits and vegetables. Members scored slightly better in the area of mental wellness, which focused on stress and depression and had an overall wellness score of 70. Stress was the biggest complicating factor; nearly 1/4 of respondents are at “high risk” for developing stress-related complications and 1/3 more are “borderline.” Approximately 22 percent of the surveyed members were found to be borderline or at a high risk of suffering from depression. Inmate Lawsuits Topic of TAC Regional Workshops Can inmates sue a sheriff or the county if they have to sleep on TAC’s 2008 Law Enforcement Regional Workshops will focus on This workshop is required for intermediate certification by the The 2008 workshops will be held at the following locations:
For more information, contact the TAC Education Department at |