Governor Perry vetoes smart growth bill

Passed unanimously in Senate

Jay Blazek Crossley, Jun 22, 09.

Governor Rick Perry has vetoed SB 2169, “relating to the establishment of a smart growth policy work group and the development of a smart growth policy for this state.”

Governor Perry released the following statement to explain his veto:

Senate Bill No. 2169 would create a new governmental body that would centralize the decision-making process in Austin for the planning of communities through an interagency work group on “smart growth” policy. Decisions about the growth of communities should be made by local governments closest to the people living and working in these areas. Local governments can already adopt “smart growth” policies based on the desires of the community without a state-led effort that endorses such planning. This legislation would promote a one-size-fits-all approach to land use and planning that would not work across a state as large and diverse as Texas.

The bill, sponsored by Senator Rodney Ellis and Representative Carol Alvarado, passed through a House committee, a Senate committee, and unanimously by all 31 Senators. It passed 99-48 in the House with bipartisan support. Forty-eight Republicans voted against it representing 34% of the Texas House of Representatives. All 74 Democrats and 25 Republicans voted in favor of the bill. Out of the 76 representatives from the 8 largest urban counties in Texas, only 18 (22%) voted against the bill. In Harris County, 6 of 25 (24%) voted against the bill, all representing suburban districts on the edge of the county. No representatives from Bexar, the central county of San Antonio; Travis, the central county of Austin; or El Paso County voted against the measure. Twelve of 33 (36%) Dallas/Fort Worth area representatives voted against the bill, most of them in suburban districts. The rest of those voting against the bill represent less dense areas of the state not experiencing the growth in absolute numbers of population like our major urban centers.

The bill would have instructed the heads of many state agencies to appoint representatives to serve on a task force charged with bringing back suggestions for the Texas legislature for ways to prepare for the projected population growth in the state. As noted by the Legislative Budget Board, “no significant fiscal implication to the state [was] anticipated” because of the bill, and its primary outcome would be that “each odd-numbered year the group [would have been] required to submit a progress report to the legislature.” The Legislative Budget Board report went on to state that were this bill to have passed “Local governments may benefit from policies developed by the smart growth policy work group, but any benefits will depend on what future policies recommend and the operating environment of each local government.” According to the bill analysis posted at Texas Legislature Online, the bill would not “expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.”

Senator Rodney Ellis, the sponsor of the bill, released a statement following the veto:

I’m very disappointed that Governor Perry vetoed two of my bills…The other vetoed bill would have created a smart growth work group so that the Department of Transportation and other state agencies could work proactively on plans to mitigate sprawl and the resultant traffic congestion. Governor Perry’s transportation plans have been inadequate, as congestion has increased and his Trans Texas Corridor went down as one of the most unpopular transportation plans in the history of transportation planning. Smart growth is a viable solution to many of our problems and the Governor missed an opportunity to grow the state’s economy in an environmentally friendly way when he vetoed the bill.

Representative Carol Alvarado, who sponsored the bill in the House disagreed with the Governor’s characterization of the bill:

I’m disappointed by Gov. Perry’s veto of Senate Bill 2169. In places like Houston that have no zoning, a smart growth policy can serve as a vital tool to ensure future development in our state occurs in a responsible manner. I want the relationship between businesses and neighborhoods to remain a positive one, free of clashes on issues like pollution or traffic congestion. SB 2169 isn’t more government, it’s strategic government cooperation necessary to move our state forward.

As noted in the Austin Chronicle, bills of legislators from urban areas appear to have had a higher chance of veto than those of others. Notably, Houston area legislators had the highest amount of bills vetoed of any area, at 9 bills, 2 of which were written by Senator Ellis and another he sponsored.

Comments

.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) said:

This is one where I think the governor sensibly went against the rush to appear responsible of a bunch of other politicians. The bill meant the creation of an inter-agency group that would end up, whether expressly authorized to do so or not, setting a policy agenda that would then be used by interested parties to push expensive and restrictive future legislation. Regarding the LBB low-fiscal-impact assessment, this would fly in the face of most history of such bodies, which add clerical loads and take members away from their original duties, for which, if they have the time for that diversion, they may not have been needed in the first place. Houston, Dallas, and other large urban areas are perfectly capable of fending for themselves in setting policies. They know their needs, and if they require specific legislation at the state level to implement local policy changes, they can get in line with the rest of the state at the next legislative session. With that approach, changes that affect the specific urban area would not have blanket effects, with unintended consequences, on the rest of the state. Good move.

Posted on Jun 23, 09 at 10:45 am

David Crossley said:

I have to disagree with you. TxDOT and others already push expensive and restrictive legislation, the biggest recent example being the Trans-Texas Corridor, perhaps the most egregious example of central planning in any state. This bill simply required the agencies to meet together to see how they might coordinate their policies rather than work at cross-purposes, as they often do now.

It’s hard to understand how you could imagine that an agency connecting to other agencies to do this would be a diversion. I would view that as one of their highest responsibilities.

Certainly urban areas are capable of fending for themselves in terms of policies, but since TxDOT and others set all the policies now and pass out the money, the urban areas are always strapped and forced to follow the agenda of one person - the Governor. Note that nearly all the stimulus funds went to the State, which told the regions how they could use it. Thus, an essentially dead “200-mile-road-to-nowhere” (as described by the man required to build it) received $181 million in the Houston region because TxDOT told the Transportation Commission that it was needed to “open up land for development.” Many people are unaware that TxDOT appears to consider that it has the responsibility for deciding what land should be developed in the urban regions.

Remember, this passed unanimously in the Senate and most of the no votes in the house were non-urban. With about 80% of Texans living in metro regions, the rural governor prevented the regions from dealing with their growth issues in a rational way.

Posted on Jun 24, 09 at 4:07 pm

.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) said:

Texas has done a poor job of protecting the environment thus far, why start now?

Perry’s days are coming to an end. Let’s hope his replacement has the wisdom to help do something more substantial for the future of our state. If we continue to sprawl out in every direction and develop in a way that is only serviceable by cars, then we are going to ruin everything that is good about life on earth.

Posted on Jun 26, 09 at 9:53 am

Page 1 of 1 pages