The Dallas HERO (Honest Elections and Reliable Oversight) initiative emerged as a local movement driven by a coalition of Dallas residents, activists, and some political leaders who argued for structural reforms in city government accountability, safety, and financial responsibility.
Concerns regarding rising crime rates, perceived deficiencies in public safety funding, and a lack of transparency and accountability in City governance fueled the initiative. Proponents of HERO contend that these issues necessitated a greater level of oversight and citizen involvement, leading to the development of propositions S, T, and U.
Two of the propositions, S and U, were approved overwhelmingly by City voters on Election Day despite staunch opposition by the City’s political establishment and the mainstream media.
“I am so grateful that the people made a choice to give power back to the people… that’s exactly what these propositions are, and it’s our constitution, it’s our City’s constitution, and it should be something that people understand in plain-speak,” HERO Executive Director Pete Marocco told podcast host Sarah Zubiate-Bennett after the election.
Proposition U, perhaps the most debated, mandates the City to maintain a police force of at least 4,000 officers and direct 50% of new revenue to fund the City’s police and fire pension systems.
This is a response to the City’s long-standing pension fund shortfall, exacerbated by risky investments years ago that severely under-resourced the fund. Former Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings has argued that this amendment is unrealistic, as it could pressure the City to hire hundreds of new officers quickly, potentially impacting hiring standards and training quality. Some leaders worry that implementing this proposition could strain resources and compromise service quality in other areas of the City budget.
Proposition T focused on evaluating the City Manager’s performance based on resident satisfaction. It required an annual survey on issues such as crime, homelessness, and infrastructure, with the City Manager’s job performance and compensation tied to the results. Voters did not endorse the proposition.
Proposition S, perhaps the most transformative of the amendments, eliminates Dallas’s governmental immunity, enabling residents to sue the City if found violating local ordinances or Texas law. Voters eagerly approved this measure at the ballot box.
“You and I have to follow the law and if we don’t, we pay a fine or go to jail. But city governments all the time just ignore the law… they ignore state law and they ignore their own ordinances and charter. How is that fair? Dallas will be the first city I know of that has to follow the law,” said HERO proponent Monty Bennett, publisher of The Dallas Express.
“The city’s outrage over this is telling…. why are they so resistant to just following the law? And the rumors out there aren’t true… this doesn’t create any liability for any individual working for the city and money damages is not a remedy. It can only force the city that’s not following a specific law to start following it,” added Bennett.
The movement arose from ongoing frustration over Dallas’s management of the police and fire pension funds, which have faced long-term financial shortfalls.
HERO supporters argued that a minimum threshold for public safety personnel is necessary to protect the City, while guaranteed funding could help stabilize the struggling pension system. The proposals gained traction through public campaigns, with HERO organizers framing the amendments as a means to empower Dallas residents by increasing governmental accountability and transparency.
City officials and their partners in the mainstream media pushed back, suggesting that HERO’s proposed changes could undermine existing governance structures, particularly by exposing the City to lawsuits.