Tyler Reporter

When local governments engage in taxpayer-funded lobbying, they spend tax revenues on agents who advocate for legislation without public commentary and often against the public interest, according to a Republican state senator.

“There is a history of local governments contracting with outside lobbyists who have in turn advocated against bills which would be beneficial to residents of local governments, such as bills lowering property taxes, restricting the power of annexation, and providing additional information on ballot initiatives,” Sen. Bob Hall (R-Edgewood) said.

Ballotpedia defines taxpayer-funded lobbying as when a city, county, or school district pays lobbying firms or associations for various political causes, which could potentially affect homeowners who are locally levied. A full list of all registered lobbyists is available on the Texas Ethics Commission website.

For example, similar to cities and counties, school districts pay dues to nonprofit associations that represent schools and school faculty or board members. 

“These associations lobby at the state level with priorities, such as continued state funding for public schools as well as continued taxation,” Hall told the Tyler Reporter. “Independent school districts also contract with individual lobbyists and those who are part of lobbying firms which may focus on education.”

Up to $41 million per year is spent by local government on Austin lobbyists, even though more than 91% of Texan voters oppose the practice, according to data from the office of Rep. Mayes Middleton (R-Wallisville).

Hall and Middleton filed bills this week that, if enacted, will ban cities, counties and school districts from hiring lobbyists with taxpayer revenue to advocate against laws that could potentially benefit homeowners statewide. The bills are identical but Middleton filed HB 749 in the state House while Hall filed SB 234 in the Senate.

“There will undoubtedly be opposition to the bill from those very organizations that currently make a profit off of representing political subdivisions like cities, counties and school districts,” Hall said in an interview. 

Some locally elected officials may also be opposed to the proposed new law as well.

“There has been significant misinformation about the bill prohibiting locally elected officials from participating in the process that simply is not true,” Hall said. “However, ending this practice has shown to be extremely popular with voters who usually have to come to Austin to advocate for themselves using their own money.”

Earlier this week, the Senate State Affairs Committee held an interim hearing where members listened to invited testimony on the topic of taxpayer-funded lobbying, according to Hall.

“It is important to note that the intent behind filing the legislation is to increase direct communication between locally-elected officials and their state representatives,” he said. “Nothing in the legislation limits or prohibits a locally elected official from contacting a state official and sharing their support or concerns for specific legislation. Likewise, the legislation does not prohibit locally-elected officials from hiring an entity to inform the officials of the impact of proposed legislation.”