2004-10-18 Special Called Workshop Meeting

Browse Search

,. ~.. ~' . ~. fJ i " ~. . . " t- t . :t.. - -, ~'. e e Aumst 2004 - the General Government policy cOmmittee met. September 2004 - the other policy _ committees met for the second and fmal time to prepare their reports. October 2004 - the reports of the legislative policy committees have now gone forward to the 2004 Resolutions Committee for consideration. October 2004 - the recommendations of the Resolutions Committee will go forward for consideration by the TML membership on the final day of the Annual Conference at the 20M' annual business meeting (Friday, October 29). December 2004 - the TML Board will finalize the League's 2005 legislative program based on resolutions passed in both 2003 and 2004. Some SU22estions for Committee Members - As can be seen from the section above, the 2004 Resolutions Committee is just one component - but a very important component - of the 1ML legislative policy development process. As integral parts of that process, members of the Resolutions Committee can significantly impact the outcome of the 2005 legislative session. Therefore, they should keep in mind the following: j;. ...... 'F. ~:"". ;.-. ~~ ~".. ~ :::-:?," ~~-/. --- ---.. ., < -.~.. ." ~ ,-- 1. There is a oracticallimit to what the Leame - or anv 2I"Ouo. for that matter - can accomplish in anv tentative session. It is obvious that all resources - human, financial, and political - are limited, and no group can hope to achieve all its legislative objectives. The most powerful interest groups in the state sometimes come away from a legislative session bruised and battered. On occasion, the best that can be expected is that no harm be done. ' 2. TML will emend the vast maioritv of its resources IdIIinI! bad biDs. This bas always been so and will probably always be the case. At one point during the 2003 regular session, the League, was monitoring more than 1,200 bills or resoluti~ns, many of which were bad for cities. The League's legislative philosophy has traditionally been, first and foremost, to defeat bad legislation and, secondarily, to seek pasSage of beneficial legislation as time, resources, and political realities pe~t. It is unlikelY that aDV'''oth~~ liaterest 2I"OUO in the state moniton and opposes as many bills ~ does the Texas Munieipal Le8I!Ue. During recent legislative sessio~ ~e,,~'too~ steps-to oppose bad legislation dealing with everything ,from':.8lineXatiori to" zoning and from birth records to cem~es~ The breadth of the League's legislative focus becomes obvious each year when TML',' ~mpl~ and subDlits its state-mandated lobbyist ;:,:' ;2 ' . '" : . , :" :,::;~~~~~~i~:~;;.: .'