|
Recommendations on proposed amendments
Published October 27, 2007
Since 1876, when our state constitution was adopted, Texas voters have approved 440 amendments to the original document.
Some were simply housekeeping measures to change archaic language or regulations.
However, many have had a real effect on the way our states operates.
Registered Texas voters began early voting last week on 16 more constitutional amendments. Some of these are housekeeping items. But this year, there are many important votes to consider.
These proposed amendments were placed on the ballot after joint resolutions were approved by at least a two-thirds vote of both the Texas House and Senate. After such vetting, many Texas voters assume approval of any amendment to the Constitution is a mere formality.
However, each measure should be examined before you cast your vote.
Today, the Times offers a review of the amendments and voting recommendations.
Propositions 4, 12, 15 and 16
If approved, would authorize the issuance of general obligation bonds. Such bonds are used by the state to borrow money. Because Article 3, section 49 of the Constitution prohibits most forms of state debt, voter approval is required before general obligation bonds can be issues.
Voters approved an amendment to the Constitution in 1997 that limited state debt to 5 percent of the average amount of the general revenue of the state. According to the state’s Bond Review Board, at the end of fiscal year 2007, the state debt was 1.33 percent of the state’s general revenue. Additional debt authorized but un-issued pushed that total up to 1.87 percent. The four propositions on the ballot calling for the issuance of general obligation bonds total $9.25 billion. The BRB estimate that if all were approved and all bonds issued, the state’s indebtedness would still be less than five percent as required by the constitution.
The state’s current financial picture is fairly rosy. The Legislature was able to add $2 billion to the rainy day fund this year and sales tax revenues are tracking ahead of projections. But since those propositions call for expanding the state’s debt, they should be carefully considered.
Proposition 1
The constitutional amendment providing for the continuation of the constitutional appropriation for facilities and other capital items at Angelo State University on a change in the governance of the university.
Earlier this year, the legislature approved the transfer of governance of Angelo State University from the Texas State University System to the Texas Tech University System. Both systems are funded by the state’s Higher Education Fund through appropriations.
The amendment simply means the HEF funding to operate ASU will be transferred to the Tech system. The two richest systems in the state, the University of Texas and Texas A&M systems, are funded through the Permanent University Fund.
Proponents claim the region’s ties with Texas Tech will benefit students, faculty and staff at Angelo State. ASU students comprised only 5 percent of the total number of students in the Texas State system and they will have more input as part of the Tech system.
Opponents cite the higher costs in the Tech system compared to the Texas State system. There also is some speculation that Tech, as is expands its system, will begin lobbying for inclusion as a recipient of PUF funds.
Texas Tech has elevated itself above the Texas State system and has long aspired to join the top-tier of state universities while offering competitive tuition rates. They have been successful and more regional affiliations make sense. We recommend approving this proposition.
Proposition 2
The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of $500 million in general obligation bonds to finance educational loans to students and authorizing bond enhancement agreements with respect to general obligation bonds issued for that purpose.
This amendment would provide additional funding in the amount of $500 million for the Hinson-Hazelwood College Student Loan Program, extending the life of the program through 2015. Bonds issued under this program do not necessarily represent “debt” incurred by Texas and its taxpayers, but rather debt to be paid back by students as loan repayments. The sale of these bonds allows Texas to generate student loan funds while obtaining those funds at the lowest possible cost by using the state’s credit rating. Opponents say these loans compete unfairly with private lending institutions and the state’s credit rating could suffer. Proponents point out the bonds will be fully repaid by loan recipients. This program will make higher education more obtainable. We recommend approval.
Proposition 3
The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide that the maximum appraised value of a residence homestead for ad valorem taxation is limited to the lesser of the most recent market value of the residence homestead as determined by the appraisal entity or 110 percent, or a greater percentage, of the appraised value of the residence homestead for the preceding tax year. The Legislature and Texas voters approved a 10 percent annual average cap on increases in property appraisals in 1997. Property that was not appraised every year could increase 10 percent for each year since the last appraisal. Under this system, if a property was not appraised for two years, that property could be subject to a 20 percent increase in appraised value. While that may reflect market conditions, property owners were hit with extraordinary increases in taxes tied to appraised values. This proposition would limit any increase to 10 percent since the last appraisal. Most arguments against this proposition are based on the fact that most large appraisal districts already reappraise property each year. Other opponents argue a 10 percent cap is not enough. When “appraisal creep” is one of the best tools for taxing entities to generate more revenue without increasing tax rates, an appraisal cap is one of the best ways for taxpayers to hold taxing entities accountable. Although this proposition may not go far enough in capping appraisal increases, we recommend approval.
Proposition 4
The constitutional amendment authorizing the issuance of up to $1 billion in bonds payable from the general revenues of the state for maintenance, improvement, repair, and construction projects and for the purchase of needed equipment.
If you’re the legislature and can’t find the money or the courage to repair existing facilities including parks, historic sites, state hospitals and prisons, what do you do? You pass a resolution and let the voters decide if they want to issues bonds to pay for the needed repairs. That’s what this proposition is all about. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice would be the largest beneficiary of these bonds and that has opponents clamoring for sentencing reforms. However, these bonds would also allow for significant repairs and renovations to our state parks, historic sites and state hospitals. Despite the legislature resorting to this type of funding mechanism, the bonds are needed to take care of existing facilities and develop new ones. While we believe necessary repairs and funding for new projects should be a regular part of the budget, we recommend approval of this proposition. If many of these repairs are not undertaken now, the costs will only increase.
Proposition 5
The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit the voters of a municipality having a population of less than 10,000 to authorize the governing body of the municipality to enter into an agreement with an owner of real property in or adjacent to an area in the municipality that has been approved for funding under certain programs administered by the Texas Department of Agriculture under which the parties agree that all ad valorem taxes imposed on the owner’s property may not be increased for the first five tax years after the tax year in which the agreement is entered into.
Explaining the reference to the Texas Department of Agriculture, this proposition would allow towns with fewer than 10,000 residents to take advantage of two programs administered by the TDA, the Downtown Revitalization program and Main Street Improvement program, and also offer up to five years of tax abatements to property owners attempting to revitalize their downtown areas. The arguments against this proposition are weak, including allowing property owners to receive state funds while benefiting from local tax abatements. If you’ve driven through a small Texas town other that Fredericksburg or Boerne, the need for redevelopment assistance is clearly evident. Local governments will ultimately make this decision to grant abatements if this proposition is passed. Those communities should be able to determine what their needs are; if they want to shift the tax burden for a couple of years to aid revitalization efforts, they should be allowed to do so. The long-term benefits should remedy that problem. We recommend approval of this proposition.
Proposition 6
The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to exempt from ad valorem taxation one motor vehicle owned by an individual and used in the course of the owner’s occupation or profession and also for personal activities of the owner. While few counties currently place personal vehicles on their property tax roles, this proposition would make it clear that one vehicle would be exempt from the tax-grab. We recommend approving this proposition.
Proposition 7
The constitutional amendment to allow governmental entities to sell property acquired through eminent domain back to the previous owners at the price the entities paid to acquire the property.
This amendment concerns the fair treatment of property owners who have endured the eminent domain process. If a government body acquires property through eminent domain and later doesn’t need it, it can go back into the hands of the original owner with no money lost, except the appreciation during the time the government held it. It also serves as encouragement to government bodies not to take more property than necessary through eminent domain. We recommend approval.
Proposition 8
The constitutional amendment to clarify certain provisions relating to the making of a home equity loan and use of home equity loan proceeds.
While this proposition fails to address what charges are subject to a constitutional fee and some other questions about unscrupulous application processes, it does provide borrowers with more protections. It may not go far enough, but it is a start. We recommend approval.
Proposition 9
The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to exempt all or part of the residence homesteads of certain totally disabled veterans from ad valorem taxation and authorizing a change in the manner of determining the amount of the existing exemption from ad valorem taxation to which a disabled veteran is entitled.
The language about exempting “all or part” of disable veteran’s homesteads from ad valorem taxes has some concerned about shifting tax burdens. In this day of property tax freezes, we can’t think of anyone more deserving. If we are going to freeze taxes, let’s give it to disabled veteran’s who have served their county and suffered a disability while doing so. We recommend approval.
Proposition 10
The constitutional amendment to abolish the constitutional authority for the office of inspector of hides and animals.
Back in the Wild West, this person help apprehend rustlers. We’ve got plenty of law enforcement agencies and private organizations battling this problem that still exists. A few counties still maintain this position and it’s time to say adios. We recommend approving this proposition, even thought the next Legislature needs to remove all language pertaining to this position.
Proposition 11
The constitutional amendment to require that a record vote be taken by a house of the legislature on final passage of any bill, other than certain local bills, of a resolution proposing or ratifying a constitutional amendment, or of any other non-ceremonial resolution, and to provide for public access on the Internet to those record votes.
The Texas newspaper and broadcasting industries have lobbied for this for years. Texas is one of only 10 states where the public sometimes has no idea how their state legislators vote on issues. While current rules in both houses require record votes, those can be suspended at any time unless this measure is approved. If you want to know how your representative votes in Austin you should be for approving this measure. We are.
Proposition 12
The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of general obligation bonds by the Texas Transportation Commission in an amount not to exceed $5 billion to provide funding for highway improvement projects.
Many Texas roads and highways are in need of improvement or repair and construction costs continue to increase. Curiously, the enabling legislation for this proposition failed to pass because it would have allowed part of these bonds to be loaned to local authorities for the construction of toll roads. In a state that is growing as fast as our, pay as you go has just about gone and went. Even though the issuance of these bonds would still place Texas below the constitutional cap on bonds, we are not ready to give another blank check to TXDOT. Voters wrote one in 2001 and look what’s happened since then. The ensuing flap over the Trans Texas Corridor and other toll roads had led to a two year-moratorium on state-financed toll roads. Even though supporters of this measure claim there is a $77 billion funding gap for needed repairs and improvements, we think it’s time for the legislature to get a better handle on road repairs and construction. How far will $5 billion go when the supposed need is $77 billion? We recommend voting no on this proposition.
Proposition 13
The constitutional amendment authorizing the denial of bail to a person who violates certain court orders or conditions of release in a felony or family violence case. Texas voters expanded judges’ ability to deny bail in 2005. The presumption of innocence is the basic tenant of our criminal justice system; the protection of victims, including victims of family violent, also should be. The denial of bail has generally been used in capital cases and others arrested for heinous or repeated felony offenses. Some argue this proposition may go too far in allowing judges the opportunity to deny bail or set high bails. Unfortunately, the docket of family violence and sexual assault crimes continues to grow with repeat offenders. We recommend voting for this proposition.
Proposition 14
The constitutional amendment permitting a justice or judge who reaches the mandatory retirement age while in office to serve the remainder of the justice’s or judge’s current term.
Under the constitution, the mandatory retirement age for judges is 75. This proposition will allow a current justice on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to finish his term. It is hard to understand why this hasn’t been an issue before. There probably are other, good judges facing the same situation. While there may be a reason the mandatory retirement age is 75, it should be up to the voters to decide if the judges they choose are fit to serve, regardless of their age. We recommend voting for this proposition.
Proposition 15
The constitutional amendment requiring the creation of the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas and authorizing the issuance of up to $3 billion in bonds payable from the general revenues of the state for research in Texas to find the causes of and cures for cancer.
Despite the attractiveness of dedicating money for private cancer research, this is a difficult proposition because Texas voters face the unusual task of deciding to dedicate public money to private entities. The debt service on this proposition could cost as much as another $1.6 billion. That said, hospitals and institutions in Texas have established themselves as worldwide leaders in cancer research. Providing some state dollars will help those facilities continue their research and efforts that could ultimately lead to better lives for us all. We recommend voting for this proposition.
Proposition 16
The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of additional general obligation bonds by the Texas Water Development Board in an amount not to exceed $250 million to provide assistance to economically distressed areas. $250 million dollars is drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of the state. Kerr County has several communities that could benefit from this fund to create water and wastewater treatment facilities. The funds would be dedicated to assist smaller, economically disadvantaged areas. $500 million already has been spent, but more is needed to help clean up our water and assist those in need. We recommend voting for this proposition.
Share |
Save |
Mail |
Print |
Comment
|
|
|
 |
|
Photo Reprints
Get Daily Times photos from the latest games and scenic locales.
Special Sections
Visitor's Guide
Real Estate Guide
Hill Country Life
Medical Directory
Home Directory
|
