Voters guide: Proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution for November 3 election

by Jake Kemp

DALLAS — It's an odd-numbered year, and I think we all know what that means, right? Right? Time to amend the Texas Constitution! Perhaps there's no soaring "Yes We Can!" rhetoric, and it's not the throwdown the impending Republican gubernatorial primary is sure to be, but this is important stuff.

Property tax appraisal regulations, eminent domain, and veterans' hospitals aren't the sexiest issues in the world, but these propositions could result in substantive reforms and real changes for many Texans. Plus, if Prop. 4 passes, University of Texas at Dallas and University of Texas at Arlington might soon be the Princeton and Yale of the South (don't laugh!). Last week, state representatives Carol Kent (District 102), Angie Chen Button (District 112), and Jerry Madden (District 67) were kind enough to sit down with 80 or so concerned citizens to explain why having the fourth-most amended constitution (we're at 456, currently) in the country was still unsatisfactory. They called it a "Public Meeting on Texas Constitutional Amendments;" I called it a party.

So let's chop it up. Amendment-style.

Proposition 1

Actual text: “The constitutional amendment authorizing the financing, including through tax increment financing, of the acquisition by municipalities and counties of buffer areas or open spaces adjacent to a military installation for the prevention of encroachment or for the construction of roadways, utilities, or other infrastructure to protect or promote the mission of the military installation."

What It Means: This amendment would allow municipalities and counties to issue bonds or notes to finance the purchase of “buffer zones” or open spaces surrounding military installations. The bonds could take the form of “tax increment bonds,” which means you pay for the land with increases in your property taxes.

Yay: Would protect military installations from encroaching development that could possibly restrict training. The amendment would also settle the issue of whether municipalities and counties have the power to issue bonds to purchase buffer zones.

Nay: Not a good time for cities and counties to be taking on additional debt. Also, this could lead to higher property taxes (not a good time for that, either).

Straight From The Horse's Mouth: "There are people who oppose this, saying it would perhaps put too much of a burden on the city, so that they would be trying to pay for that land as opposed to keeping it in the tax base. My personal opinion is that this benefits our cities, our counties, and our military establishments." - Rep. Carol Kent

Proposition 2

Actual text: “The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for the ad valorem taxation of a residence homestead solely on the basis of the property's value as a residence homestead.”

What It Means: This would require primary residence homesteads to be appraised solely on their value as a residence. Currently, an appraisal practice known as “highest and best use” allows a property to be appraised on its potential value rather than its current use.

Yay: Residences near new commercial development are often subject to massive increases in appraisal values. However, just because there is development in an area does not necessarily mean that the property owner benefits from it. This would help protect homeowners. The state already extends similar protections to agricultural and open-space land.

Nay: Some argue that the “highest and best use” standard is legitimate because it has impact on the sales price, which shows the real value. This amendment would reduce local tax revenues.

Straight From The Horse's Mouth: "This is the one that has had the most misinformation put out about it. There have been people saying that this is a statewide property tax. The constitution of the state of Texas clearly prohibits a statewide property tax. There is no statewide property tax in any amendment that is here." - Rep. Jerry Madden

Proposition 3

Actual text: "The constitutional amendment providing for uniform standards and procedures for the appraisal of property for ad valorem tax purposes."

What It Means: Currently, the Texas Constitution requires that standards and procedures for property tax appraisal originate in the county where the tax will be imposed. This amendment would remove this requirement, and require that enforcement of uniform standards and procedures for appraisal be determined by the Texas Legislature.

Yay: This would allow property in one county to be appraised the same way as similar property in another county. The state has an interest in these practices being uniform, because funding to public schools is allocated based on the per-student aggregate taxable property value in each school district.

Nay: This proposition would give up local control to the state, which might not understand local conditions.

Straight From The Horse’s Mouth: "Some people have described this bill as establishing a 'common strike zone,' and I think that's absolutely right." - Rep. Angie Chen Button

Proposition 4

Actual text: "The constitutional amendment establishing the national research university fund to enable emerging research universities in this state to achieve national prominence as major research universities and transferring the balance of the higher education fund to the national research university fund."

What It Means: This proposition would create a new “National Research University Fund” to help Texas create more top-tier research universities. Currently, there are only two: University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University. Seven other universities in Texas are considered “emerging research universities,” and they would be eligible for the funding. The money would come from the balance of a dormant education fund created by the legislature in 1995.

Yay: Tier-one universities are the best way to develop a highly-skilled workforce and keep Texas competitive in a global economy. Currently, Texas loses more than 10,000 high school graduates a year to doctorate-granting universities in other states. With a population of 24 million and only two public tier-one universities, Texas trails states like New York (seven) and California (nine).

Nay: Since the funding for this proposition already exists, the chief complaint against it is that the fund should be focused on the two or three universities with the best chance of achieving tier-one status, rather than spreading the funding across seven schools.

Straight From The Horse's Mouth: "If you want a university in your community that rates on the level of MIT, Cal-Berkeley, or Princeton, or Yale, this is the opportunity because there are 7 or 8 universities that are eligible for this, and only 3 or 4 that will make it right off the bat, and I personally think the top one is the University of Dallas, and we will have that kind of university that we need so badly." - Rep. Jerry Madden

Proposition 5

Actual Text: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to authorize a single board of equalization for two or more adjoining appraisal entities that elect to provide for consolidated equalizations."

What It Means: Currently, every county must have its own tax appraisal review board or “board of equalization” to resolve disputes between taxpayers and the appraisal district. This proposition would allow any two or more adjoining districts to consolidate their review process.

Yay: Rural, sparsely populated counties have a hard time finding enough people to serve as qualified appraisal review board members. This proposition does not require that counties combine review boards, but rather gives them the option to do whatever is best for local needs.

Nay: Each individual county may be most familiar with the property they must judge. This proposition may remove local control. Some also argue that this amendment does not go far enough; rural counties should be able to consolidate even more of their appraisal functions.

Straight From The Horse's Mouth: "This is a benefit particularly for our larger, western counties with sparse populations and sometimes-limited resources of professionals who understand the appraised value of property. This will allow counties to share resources ... This is permissive. We in legislature like things that are permissive, where we are not telling people what to do, because we are giving them the option." - Rep. Carol Kent

Proposition 6

Actual Text: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the Veterans' Land Board (VLB) to issue general obligation bonds in amounts equal to or less than amounts previously authorized."

What It Means: This amendment would renew the VLB’s authority to continue issuing and selling bonds to Texas veterans at lower-than-market rates, and reduce restrictions on the principal amount of bonds allowed to be outstanding at any one time.

Yay: This proposition would provide uninterrupted, ensured funding for the VLB to continue its Veterans Housing Assistance and Veteran Land programs. Currently, the board must return to the legislature and the voters every four years.

Nay: Issuing state-backed bonds that extend for an unlimited amount of time with no oversight would be unwise. State assistance should be reviewed and adjusted on a regular basis.

Straight From The Horse's Mouth: "This would eliminate the possibility of them (the Veterans' Land Board) going state to state, and the state saying, 'Oh you can't get your home, the state's out of money.'" - Rep. Jerry Madden

Proposition 7

Actual text: "The constitutional amendment to allow an officer or enlisted member of the Texas State Guard or other state militia or military force to hold other civil offices."

What It Means: This amendment would allow members of the Texas State Guard to hold a public office simultaneously.

Yay: County commissioners, justices of the peace, notaries public, postmasters, and current and retired officers and enlisted members of the National Guard and U.S. Armed Forces are already exempt from the law that prohibits civil officials from holding more than one compensated office. This amendment would correct the oversight in earlier amendments that excluded the Texas State Guard.

Nay: The Texas State Guard is called on in times of disaster. State employees have a duty to do their job in times of disaster, and having another job vying for their services in these times would be unreasonable.

Straight From The Horse's Mouth: "I'm not so sure that it was an unintended oversight. The guard was not very active at one time, but they have recently due to things like hurricanes, become very active and have become more actively deployed around the state, that's why this is important now." - Rep. Jerry Madden

Proposition 8

Actual Text: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the state to contribute money, property, and other resources for the establishment, maintenance, and operation of veterans hospitals in this state."

What It Means: This amendment would allow the state to contribute money, property and other resources to establish, maintain, and operate veterans hospitals and health care facilities.

Yay: Texas ranks third in the country in the number of veterans residing in the state. Some of these veterans, particularly in the Rio Grande Valley area, must travel 300 miles to the nearest veterans’ hospital. The cost and hassle of long travel keeps makes it harder for veterans to get the care they need and deserve.

Nay: The opposition to this amendment focuses on the notion of whether or not a constitutional amendment is necessary to accomplish the goal of working with the federal government and local governments to provide better health care for veterans.

Straight From The Horse's Mouth: "There are some places in the state where a veteran has to go several hundred miles, particularly true in the valley, they need veteran's health care facilities in the valley. That was the primary driving force behind this amendment." - Rep. Jerry Madden

Proposition 9

Actual Text: "The constitutional amendment to protect the right of the public, individually and collectively, to access and use the public beaches bordering the seaward shore of the Gulf of Mexico."

What It Means: This amendment would establish that the public has an unrestricted right to access and use a “public beach.” It would also authorize the legislature to enact laws to protect that right and to protect the public beach easement from interference and encroachments.

Yay: This amendment would strengthen the 1959 Open Beaches Act by enshrining it in the state constitution. Currently, several lawsuits are challenging that law, and this amendment would reduce such litigation by clarifying the law's intent to keep public beaches public.

Nay: The proposition could infringe on the rights of private property owners. Hurricane Ike’s storm surge changed the vegetation line in some areas and left many homes on the public beaches. Putting this proposition in the Constitution would make this problem worse by making it more difficult to change the law in the future.

Straight From The Horse’s Mouth: "If we can pass this amendment, we will have a better argument in these lawsuits with these powerful land developers." - Rep. Angie Chen Button

Proposition 10

Actual text: "The constitutional amendment to provide that elected members of the governing boards of emergency services districts may serve terms not to exceed four years."

What It Means: Currently, the Texas Constitution limits the terms of emergency service district board members to two years. This proposition would allow members to serve terms of up to four years.

Yay: Longer terms would create more stability and continuity on emergency services districts’ boards, and would also help avoid the politicization of non-partisan positions. A longer service term would also allow board commissioners to gain expertise.

Nay: Longer terms could make the officials less accountable to the public and diminish oversight. This is particularly important considering the fact that these district boards have the power to levy taxes.

Straight From The Horse’s Mouth: "This is something (emergency services districts) that is crucial for safety in many of our rural areas. It's difficult to get leadership on these boards. And once you get a good leader, and that leader is trained, the communities would like to be able to keep that leader for longer than just two years." - Rep. Carol Kent

Proposition 11

Actual text: "The constitutional amendment to prohibit the taking, damaging, or destroying of private property for public use unless the action is for the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property by the State, a political subdivision of the State, the public at large, or entities granted the power of eminent domain under law or for the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property, but not for certain economic development or enhancement of tax revenue purposes, and to limit the legislature's authority to grant the power of eminent domain to an entity."

What It Means: Eminent domain gives government the power to take private property for public use and requires them to give "just compensation" for the property. This amendment would guarantee that the property taken would be for a government use or to eliminate urban blight on a particular parcel of property. Property could not be taken for economic development or to increase tax revenue, meaning, the government cannot take the property and sell it to a private entity for profit. It would also close a loophole that allows governmental entities to take well-maintained land on grounds of "blight," claiming that the taking is necessary because surrounding parcels are blighted, by allowing a government to condemn for blight only if the parcel being condemned is itself blighted.

Yay: This proposition would strengthen the ban on taking property for economic development by making the ban a part of the Texas Constitution. The amendment would also give a more precise definition of what constitutes public use.

Nay: Locking eminent domain restrictions into the Constitution, which requires a vote of the electorate to amend, would make future problems harder overcome if there are unintended consequences. Furthermore, the proposed amendment would allow the legislature, on a two-thirds vote of all the members, to grant any entity, including a private entity, the authority of eminent domain.

Straight From The Horse's Mouth: "I think it's interesting in the wording of the amendment the state included 'enjoyment' of the property..." - Rep. Angie Chen Button

• Staff
• Verified User
• Anonymous