2011 Constitutional Amendments

8/4/2019 2011 Constitutional Amendments

1/7

2011 Constitutional Amendments

Proposition 1 (SJR 14): Property Tax Exemption for the Surviving Spouse of a DisabledVeteran

The Ballot Reads:

"The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for anexemption from ad valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homesteadof the surviving spouse of a 100 percent or totally disabled veteran."

Summary: In 2007, Texas voters approved a constitutional amendment to allow for totallydisabled veterans to receive a complete exemption from property taxes on their primaryresidence. Proposition 1 extends the property tax exemption for the residential homestead oftotally disabled veteran to their surviving spouse upon the death of the disabled veteran if theproperty the disabled veteran resided at received a complete exemption in the prior tax year, thesurviving spouse is over 55 years old and has not remarried, and the property remains theresidential homestead of the surviving spouse.

Supporters Say: Current state law allows for a complete property tax exemption for disabledveterans, but when the veteran dies, their surviving spouse would be subject to full tax liability inthe following year. A surviving spouse can inherit existing property tax freezes for the elderlyand disabled, so this law will remain consistent with current constitutional provisions.

Opponents Say: The property tax exemption would lower property tax revenues to schooldistricts and local governments slightly.

Proposition 2 (SJR 4): Provide the Texas Water Development Board Additional BondingAuthority

The Ballot Reads: "The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of additionalgeneral obligation bonds by the Texas Water Development Board in an amount not to exceed $6billion at any time outstanding."

Summary: Proposition 2 will allow for the Texas Water Development Board to issue $6 billionin bonds to provide for projects in the State Water Plan through the Texas Water DevelopmentFund II. This constitutional amendment will "evergreen" the bonding authority instead ofrequiring constitutional authority for future bonds submitted to the voters when the bonds arepaid off. As local governments repay their bond debts and retire the debt, the Texas WaterDevelopment Board may re-issue additional bonds for future water projects up to an aggregateprincipal of $6 billion.

Supporters Say: The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) was created in 1957 todevelop the state water plan and finance infrastructure improvements to water and waste watersystems to improve the state's water supply. The current money available for loans to localgovernments to finance projects through the existing bonding authority of the TWDB will beexhausted soon and voters would need to approve the additional debt in a constitutional


2/7

amendment election for future projects. This constitutional amendment will allow the TWDBadditional bonding authority but also allow the agency to issue additional bonds to finance futureprojects as the state and local governments retire the existing debts without having to have afuture bond election.

Opponents Say: This ballot proposition will expand the state's debt by $6 billion at a time whenthe state is near its constitutional debt limit and concerns abound over increasing public debt.Furthermore, the Legislature and voters should periodically vote to approve additional bondingauthority instead of allowing the TWDB the ability to re-issue additional bonds without a vote ofapproval.

Proposition 3 (SJR 50): Authorize General Obligation Bonds to Finance Higher EducationLoans to Students

The Ballot Reads: "The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of general

obligation bonds of the State of Texas to finance educational loans to students."

Summary: Proposition 3 will allow for the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board toissue and sell general obligation bonds to finance student loans. The total amount of the bondsauthorized must be less than or equal to the total aggregate principal of previously authorizedhigher education student loan bonds, which is calculated to be $400 million by the HigherEducation Coordinating Board.

Supporters Say: Texas voters have authorized bonds totaling $1.86 billion for the Hinson-Hazlewood loan program through constitutional amendment elections since 1965. TheLegislature sets the interest rate on these loans to ensure students pay a low amount of interest onthe loans. By allowing the Higher Education Coordinating Board the ability to authorizeadditional bonds up to an amount of the aggregate principle once the bonds have been repaid bythe students, the agency can re-authorize additional bonds for future financial assistance.

Opponents Say: This ballot proposition would increase the state's debt obligation and increasegovernment debt during a weak economy. Furthermore, higher education is not a necessity forstudents to attend; students should take out loans from private banks that can assess a student'srisk more accurately than the Higher Education Coordinating Board. For college to becomemore affordable, the Legislature should control costs and administration instead of issuingadditional state debt to pay for a student's education.

Proposition 4 (HJR 63): Allow Counties to Implement Tax Increment Financing

The Ballot Reads: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit a countyto issue bonds or notes to finance the development or redevelopment of an unproductive,underdeveloped, or blighted area and to pledge for repayment of the bonds or notes increases inad valorem taxes imposed by the county on property in the area. The amendment does notprovide authority for increasing ad valorem tax rates."


3/7

Summary: The Texas Constitution currently allows for a municipality to issue bonds to financeprojects to develop tax increment finance zones (TIF) and transportation reinvestment zones(TRZ). These zones utilize a portion of existing property tax revenue to finance bonds forprojects, including highway projects, to revitalize blighted areas and develop public

improvement projects. The highway construction projects are developed and financed inconjunction with the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT). Proposition 4 will allowcounties the same financing tools to create transportation reinvestment zones for transportationprojects the county has jurisdiction over. This ballot proposition will allow for a portion of acounty's property tax revenue, for a county that chooses to create a transportation reinvestmentzone, to be used to finance the road construction and improvements.

Supporters Say: Local governments need additional financing options to develop transportationprojects. The creation of transportation reinvestment zones has proven to provide municipalitieswith flexibility to use a portion of their existing property tax revenues in dedicated taxing zonesfor road projects. The constitutional amendment will extend the same use of a transportation

reinvestment zone to allow a county to use a portion of their existing property tax revenues incertain designated zones for road construction projects.

Opponents Say: Counties can already use property taxes to develop and build road projectswithout the use of a transportation reinvestment zone. As the transportation project is developed,the properties within the zone will be appraised at a higher level which will increase the propertytaxes paid by those land-owners. Some of the projects currently funded by municipalitiesthrough tax increment finance zones are pass-through toll projects in conjunction with theTXDOT in where the toll revenue and property taxes are used to repay bonds issued by TXDOTfor the initial highway project.

Proposition 5 (SJR 26): Allow for Counties and Cities to Enter into Interlocal Agreementswithout the Imposition of a Tax

The Ballot Reads: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to allow cities orcounties to enter into interlocal contracts with other cities or counties without the imposition of atax or the provision of a sinking fund."

Summary: Proposition 5 will allow for counties and municipalities to jointly administerprograms, provide services, or develop long-term infrastructure without having to impose a newtax or enter into new debt. Under current law, an interlocal agreement that extends beyond oneyear constitutes a debt obligation which would require a tax to pay for the debt.

Supporters Say: Many programs can be jointly run by a county and city less expensively withno duplication of services. Proposition 5 clarifies that interlocal contracts can be entered into forlonger than one year without creating an additional debt service fund and a tax to finance thedebt service. This will allow for long-term agreements between municipalities, counties, andspecial districts for special projects and to reduce the duplication in some services within largermetropolitan areas.


4/7

Opponents Say: No apparent opposition.

Proposition 6 (HJR 109): Distribute a Portion of the Permanent School Fund Revenue to the

Available School Fund

The Ballot Reads: "The constitutional amendment clarifying references to the permanentschool fund, allowing the General Land Office to distribute revenue from permanent school fundland or other properties to the available school fund to provide additional funding for publiceducation, and providing for an increase in the market value of the permanent school fund for thepurpose of allowing increased distributions from the available school fund."

Summary: The Permanent School Fund is established as a state trust that holds the proceedsfrom state land and mineral rights and is constitutionally managed by the School Land Board,which is comprised of the Land Commissioner and two appointees. The Texas Constitution

allows for up to 6 percent of the average market value of the permanent school fund on the lastday of each of the 16 state fiscal quarters preceding the regular session of the legislature to bedistributed from the permanent school fund to the available school fund. The School Land Boardand State Board of Education currently make the permanent school fund investment decisionsdetermines the amount of the revenues from state lands, minerals, real estate investments androyalty interests that are deposited into the Permanent School Fund and are available to transferto the Available School Fund.

Proposition 6 would allow for up to $300 million of the revenues derived from land andproperties to be constitutionally transferred directly to the available school fund by the LandCommissioner annually and clarify that real estate investments derived from the permanentschool fund property will be included in the calculation of the market value of the permanentschool fund.

Supporters Say: A recent Attorney General opinion clouded the constitutionality of the SchoolLand Board's ability to transfer proceeds from the Permanent School Fund to the AvailableSchool Fund. This constitutional amendment clarifies that up to $300 million of the revenuesfrom the fund may be transferred to the Available School Fund annually without harming thecorpus of the Permanent School Fund investments.

Opponents Say: The revenues from the School Land Board investments are currentlytransferred to the Permanent School Fund to allow the State Board of Education the ability toensure the revenues are utilized to directly benefit public education. By transferring the revenuesdirectly to the Available School Fund, the State Board of Education may not be involved in adecision to reinvest the revenues into the fund corpus to make additional investment revenue infuture years, depending on the market conditions. In years in which the market is uncertain oroil and gas royalties decline, the amount of revenue available to transfer to the Available SchoolFund may not reach the dollar amount set in the constitution, which may jeopardize the futurecorpus of the fund and hurt long-term investments.


5/7

Proposition 7 (SJR 28): Allow El Paso County to issue Bonds for Parks and RecreationalFacilities

The Ballot Reads: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit

conservation and reclamation districts in El Paso County to issue bonds supported by ad valoremtaxes to fund the development and maintenance of parks and recreational facilities."

Summary: Proposition 7 would allow for El Paso County to issue bonds for the purpose ofdeveloping and maintaining parks and recreational facilities and levy taxes to repay the bondindebtedness. Currently, ten other counties in Texas have this authority.

Supporters Say: Proposition 7 will allow the residents in El Paso County to ability to decide tocreate a parks district. El Paso's population is growing and the county needs coordinated andplanned infrastructure development for parks and recreation.

Opponents Say: Proposition 7 will allow for the creation of a new taxing district with advalorem property taxes and public debt in El Paso County.

Proposition 8 (SJR 16): Provide a Special Property Tax Appraisal for Open-Space LandDedicated for Water StewardshipThe Ballot Reads: "The constitutional amendment providing for the appraisal for ad valoremtax purposes of open-space land devoted to water-stewardship purposes on the basis of itsproductive capacity."

Summary: The Texas Constitution allows for special appraisals of open-space land foragriculture, wildlife management, and timber purposes based on the productive output of theproperty. Water stewardship would mean using open-space and timber land through at leastthree ways that promote erosion control, habitat stewardship, management of groundwaterresources, and other defined methods to promote water conservation and improve water quality.The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and Comptroller will develop the specificqualifications for the reduced property tax appraisals.

Supporters Say: This constitutional amendment will create economic incentives for land-owners to partner with the state to protect water resources. During the drought conditions we arecurrently experiencing, tax incentives are one way for the state to use voluntary initiatives fromland-owners improve water quality and conserve water supply. The constitutional amendmentdoes not create a new tax exemption, but instead allows the legislature to provide for a propertytax appraisal based on the productive use of existing open-space and timber lands if approvedwater stewardship activities take place on those lands.

Opponents Say: Proposition 8 could create duplicative appraisal options for wildlifemanagement valuation and existing open-space properties. Farmers and ranchers alreadypromote water conservation out of necessity for their agriculture lands, which already receive


6/7

special appraisals. The additional special appraisals would be special cases for certain open-space and timber properties that could complicate the existing appraisal methods and may notprovide those land-owners any additional tax incentives.

Proposition 9 (SJR 9): Allow the Governor to Pardon a Person who has Completed DeferredAdjudication

The Ballot Reads: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the governor to grant a pardon toa person who successfully completes a term of deferred adjudication community supervision."

Summary: Proposition 9 will allow for the Governor to pardon a person who has successfullycompleted a term deferred adjudication community supervision as a punishment. A person whois granted a pardon after completing deferred adjudication would be able to apply to the TexasBoard of Pardons and Paroles to have their criminal record that resulted in deferred adjudicationexpunged after meeting certain requirements.

Supporters Say: The Constitution currently allows the Governor to pardon those who havebeen convicted of a crime. Deferred adjudication cases do not carry a conviction, so theGovernor cannot issue pardons for those who successfully complete their term of service.Proposition 9 will allow for an equal avenue of relief for individuals who have been convicted ofa crime and those who have served deferred adjudication, but a person must wait at least 10 yearsbefore applying to the Board of Pardons and Paroles for a pardon for deferred adjudication.

Opponents Say: The change in the law will also allow for a person to request an expunction oftheir criminal records upon a pardon for successfully completing deferred adjudication. Thestate should be cautious of expunging criminal records, even when a conviction has not beenhanded down by the court. Also, pardons are designed for those who have been convicted ofcrimes. In the cases of deferred adjudication, a conviction has not been given so a pardon wouldnot be necessary.

Proposition 10 (SJR 37): Change the Length of the Unexpired Term of Elected Officials whoBecome Candidates for Another Office

The Ballot Reads: "The constitutional amendment to change the length of the unexpired termthat causes the automatic resignation of certain county or district officeholders if they becomecandidates for another office."

Summary: The Texas Constitution currently requires for an automatic resignation of the currentoffice held by an elected official if the elected official would announce to seek another officewithin one year of the end of the unexpired term. Proposition 10 extends the time limit from oneyear to one year and 30 days for the automatic resignation due to the passage of Senate Bill 100which advances the official filing period for state and local offices to begin in mid-November toaccommodate absentee and overseas ballots.


7/7

Supporters Say: Proposition 10 is necessary as the state filing deadline was moved forwardfrom January 2 to the 2nd Monday in December to implement the federal Military and OverseasVoter Empowerment (MOVE) Act. As such, the constitutional limitation that requires anautomatic resignation for a person who currently serves in one elected office but files for anotherelected office is extended from 1 year to 1 year and 30 days to avoid the need for special

elections to fill unexpired terms at local and district level offices.

Opponents Say: The resign-to-run provision should be repealed and not simply revised toreconcile it with an earlier candidate filing period. State elected officials who seek higherelected office are not required to resign to run for that office. Local and district elected officialswho announce for higher office should be treated the same as state elected officials whoannounce for higher office.

Documents

2011 Constitutional Amendments