Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton Sues Dallas Over Police Funding Shortfall
DALLAS, Texas — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against Dallas city officials, accusing the city of failing to comply with Proposition U, a public safety measure approved by voters in 2024 that mandates specific funding levels for police and fire pensions as well as minimum staffing requirements for the police department. The legal action, announced on February 16, 2026, names Dallas City Manager Kimberly Bizor Tolbert and Chief Financial Officer Jack Ireland Jr. as defendants.
Proposition U requires that 50% of all new annual revenue received by the city be allocated toward police and fire pensions. Additionally, the measure stipulates that Dallas maintain a minimum police force of 4,000 officers — an increase of roughly 900 officers compared to the department’s staffing levels in 2024. According to Paxton’s lawsuit, the city has unlawfully refused to meet these funding and staffing obligations, undermining public safety commitments made to voters.
Paxton, a Republican currently campaigning for the U.S. Senate, emphasized that the lawsuit seeks to enforce the clear directives of Proposition U, which was overwhelmingly approved by Dallas residents to enhance law enforcement resources amid concerns over rising crime rates. “The people of Dallas voted to ensure their police officers are properly funded and equipped to keep communities safe,” Paxton said in a statement. “Failure to comply with this measure is not only illegal but jeopardizes public safety.”
The lawsuit highlights that Dallas has not directed the mandated portion of new revenue to police and fire pensions, nor has it increased the police force to the required minimum. This shortfall, Paxton argues, violates both the letter and spirit of the voter-approved proposition.
Dallas officials have yet to issue a formal response to the lawsuit. However, the case is expected to draw significant attention as it underscores ongoing debates about municipal budgeting priorities, public safety funding, and voter mandates. The city’s financial management and compliance with local referenda have been scrutinized in recent years, particularly as Texas cities grapple with balancing public safety demands and fiscal constraints.
The lawsuit filed by Paxton’s office is part of a broader trend of state attorneys general enforcing voter-approved measures and state laws related to public safety funding. For example, the Texas Attorney General’s Office has previously pursued legal actions to uphold state statutes governing law enforcement and public safety.
Proposition U’s requirements reflect a growing movement in Texas and nationwide to ensure that police departments receive adequate funding for pensions and staffing to maintain effective law enforcement presence. The measure’s passage by Dallas voters in 2024 came amid heightened public concern over crime and police resources, mirroring similar initiatives in other major cities.
Legal experts note that the case could set an important precedent for how municipalities must adhere to voter-approved funding mandates. According to the National League of Cities, compliance with local referenda is essential for maintaining public trust and ensuring that elected officials honor the will of their constituents.
As the lawsuit proceeds, residents and city officials alike will be closely watching the outcome to see how Dallas addresses its police funding obligations and whether the court enforces the provisions of Proposition U. The case also raises broader questions about the balance between local control and state enforcement in matters of public safety.
For more information on Texas law enforcement funding and public safety initiatives, visit the Texas Department of Public Safety and the U.S. Department of Justice websites.
Leave a Reply