Texas Ballot Provisions

7/27/2019 Texas Ballot Provisions

1/5

Prop. 1

The constitutionalamendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad

valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homestead of the surviving

spouse of a member of the armed services of the UnitedStates who is killed in action.

Summary: This proposition grants a property tax exemption to the spouse of service members who have

been killed in action- YES

Reasoning: These service members have voluntarily given their life in defense of our nation. Their

spouses do not deserve to live in fear of losing their property because of a lack of income.

Arguments: The primary argument against this proposition is that it will erode the tax base.

Prop. 2

The constitutionalamendment eliminating an obsolete requirement for a State Medical

Education Board and a State MedicalEducation Fund, neither of which is operational.

Summary: This proposition is simply a cleaning up of the State Constitution.-YES

Reasoning: Both the State Medical Education Board and the State Medical Education Fund are inactive

and their functions have been transferred to the state Attorney General and Higher Education

Coordinating Board.

Arguments: There has been no apparent opposition to this proposition.

Prop. 3

The constitutionalamendment to authorize a political subdivision of this state to extend the

number of days that aircraft parts that are exempt from ad valorem taxation due to their location

in this state for a temporary period may be located in this state for purposes of qualifying for the

taxexemption.

Summary: This proposition would allow local government the option of exempting aerospace

technology businesses from the inventory tax.YES

Reasoning: In 1989 Texas voters decided that to encourage manufacturing and commercial work within

the state that tangible inventory that met certain criteria would be exempt from the inventory tax for

175 days. If the product was exported from the state within that time period no tax would be owed.

Aircraft parts, among other things, came under this constitutional amendment. Now with aerospace

technologies booming and Houston being an active center aircraft parts sellers are claiming that to

remain competitive with a majority of other states that have no inventory tax Texas needs to extend the

amount of days that aircraft parts can remain exempt from 175 days to 730 days.

Arguments:

Support: The heart of the argument in support of this proposition are stated above. Texas needs to


2/5

remain competitive with other states. There has been at least on aerospace technology business that

has taken their work outside of Texas because of this inventory tax. Political subdivisions should be

allowed the choice of extending the number of days if they see it fit.

Opposition: Those that oppose this proposition have stated that it will continue the erosion of the tax

base and that it raises questions of tax equality under the law. If aerospace technology is able to receive

this extension of days than how many other manufacturing businesses will be able to come up with an

argument for why they also need an extension? Are we going to grant an extension to every business

that asks?

Prop. 4

The constitutionalamendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad

valorem taxation of part of the market value of the residence homestead of a partially disabled

veteran or the surviving spouse of a partially disabled veteran if the residence homestead was

donatedto the disabled veteran by a charitable organization.

Summary: Proposition 4 provides a property tax exemption on the homes donated to disabled veterans

by charity organizations.- YES

Reasoning: Homes donated by charities to disabled veterans in honor of their selfless defense of our

nation do not deserve to be taxed.

Arguments: The main argument against this proposition is that it will erode the tax base.

Prop. 5

The constitutionalamendment to authorize the making of a reverse mortgage loan for thepurchase of homestead property and to amend lender disclosures and other requirements in

connection with a reverse mortgage loan.

Summary: This proposition would allow a reverse mortgage for the purchase of a residence homestead.

The purchaser would have to occupy the home as a primary residence by a specified date to close the

reverse mortgage contract. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) runs a

Home Equity Conversion Mortgage for Purchase program which allows seniors 62 years or older to buy a

new primary residence using reverse mortgage loans. Texas is the only state that does not take part of

this program because our state constitution does not expresslyauthorize the use of reverse mortgages

for the purchasing of new homes.-YES

Reasoning:While I am opposed to the use of reverse mortgages for buying new homes for severalreasons I believe this is a matter of personal liberty. Texas has no right to tell property owners how they

may or may not use personal property, as risky as the consequences may be. Government is not here to

protect us from our own stupidity.


3/5

Arguments:

Support: Prop. 5 would allow seniors to make informed decisions concerning the available options for

purchasing new home that better fits their personal needs and desires. It would give seniors the choice

of using HUDs reverse mortgage home purchase program allowing them to come under the protection

of regulations and restrictions passed by HUD on home equity loans. Prop. 5 would allow these seniors

to combine what are normally two clumsy steps into one.

Opposition: Texas has a long history of being skeptical of home equity loans, making us slow to embrace

reverse mortgages. Many argue that it is Texas tight restrictions on home equity loa ns that protected us

from the worst consequences of the 2008 economic fallout. If we loosen these restrictions and enter the

HUD reverse home mortgage purchase program we could be vulnerable to future economic fallout.

Allowing people to enter into complicated home loans will very possibly result in our seniors going

underwater and leading to negative consequences.

Prop. 6

The constitutionalamendment providing for the creation of the State Water ImplementationFund for Texas and the State Water Implementation Revenue Fund for Texas to assist in the

financing of priority projects in the state water plan to ensure the availability of adequate water

resources.

Summary: This proposition would create the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas (SWIFT). In

addition it would take $2 billion from the Rainy Day Fund for the combating of the intense drought

Texas is undergoing.-NO

Reasoning: This issue is very unique in that there are liberals, conservatives, and conservation groups on

both sides of this issue. In 2011 Texans voted to give the government $6 billion for the exact same

purpose of combating drought. The money has not been touched. Prop. 6 will place the additional fundsin the hands of SWIFT which will use this money to incentivize more local debt. This is not only foolish

but dangerous seeing the deep levels of debt that local governments already find themselves in. There is

no guarantee that the additional funds will be used for priority water projects that are sustainable. An

extra 32 employees will be added when there is already 32 different state agencies and departments

that manage our states natural resources. The state has refused to allow the free market to take part in

working towards sustainable solutions and refused to tackle any water problems until the thirdspecial

legislative session was called.

Arguments:

Support: Texas is in a drought crisis and both sides of this issue readily admit this. While east Texas hasreceived its fair amount of rainfall the rest of the state has endured months of little rainfall. Securing

Texass water needs will allow Texas to remain competitive with the rest of the nation. No water, no

business. Our population is expected to double in the next 40 years and this will bring an increased

water demand. SWIFT will provide the funds for implementing a new range of strategies from

conservation to desalination. With no action another major drought could prove devastating to the

Texas economy.


4/5

Opposition: Among the arguments in opposition I stated in Reasoning there is also the less trumpeted

fact that the six billion that will be taken from the Rainy Day fund will be under the control of a the

water board that is composed of three unelected officials. Taking money from the Rainy Day Fund

instead of the General Revenue Fund is simply a way of dodging the states spending cap.

Prop. 7

The constitutionalamendment authorizing a home-rule municipality to provide in its charter the

procedure to fill a vacancy on its governing body for which the unexpired term is 12 months or

less.

Summary: Prop. 7 would permit local municipalities to fill vacancies through appointment instead of

through a special election if they so choose.-NO

Reasoning:This is, quite simply, an erosion of democracy at the local level. Appointments should beavoided as much as possible. This will leave the appointed officials unanswerable to the people for the

rest of the term he is fulfilling and gives the governing body who did the appointing too much free rein.

Special elections work and are worth the small cost in insuring accountability in local government.

Arguments:

Support: Prop. 7 will bring grant the municipalities local control. It will allow municipalities that are large

the choice of filling vacancies when the cost of holding special elections are too much, thus cutting costs

to taxpayers. And it will still preserve democracy because an election would still have to be held when

the unexpired term is filled. Cost will be cut and democracy will be preserved.

Opposition: The heart of the propositions opposition is stated in Reasoning.

Prop. 8

The constitutionalamendment repealing Section 7, Article IX, Texas Constitution, which relates

to the creation of a hospitaldistrict in Hidalgo County.

Summary: In 1960 Texas voters approved an amendment that authorized the legislature to create

special hospital districts in certain counties, including Hidalgo County. The maximum tax rate to sustain

these special hospital districts was capped at 75 cents per $100 of taxable property, excepting Hidalgo

County. Hidalgo County is tax rate is capped at 10 cents per $100.-YES

Reasoning: Hidalgo County is the largest county without a hospital district and the only county that hastheir tax rate capped at ten cents per $100. This county also has one of the lowest tax bases per capita

and has trouble raising sufficient money with their tax rate at far below the maximum allowed for other

counties. While removing all constitutional limitations on the taxing powers of counties would be the

better solution until a proposition doing so is presented this proposition is correcting a constitutional

discrepancy concerning Hidalgo County.


5/5

Arguments:

Support: In addition to what is stated above, this proposition, if passed, would have to receive the

approval of Hidalgo County voters before the maximum tax rate could be increased.

Opposition: This prop. will open the doors to increasing the taxes in Hidalgo County. The tax rate could

even reach the maximum of 75 cents per $100 of taxable property. And aiding in the establishment of

special districts for whatever purpose only lends to confusion of where taxpayer dollars are being spent

and will undoubtedly increase the complexity of local government.

Prop. 9

The constitutionalamendment relating to expanding the types of sanctions that may be

assessed against a judge or justice following a formal proceeding instituted by the State

Commission on Judicial Conduct.

Summary: The state constitution established the State Commission on Judicial Conduct. The duty of thisCommission is to investigate allegations of misconduct in state judges. If the Commission opensformal

proceedings concerning a complaint about judicial misconduct the only sanctions they are allowed to

pursue are publicly censuring or recommending the removal or retirement of the judge. By contrast, if

informalproceedings are opened the Commission is authorized to publicly admonish, issue a reprimand,

or recommend the retiring or removing of the judge. This proposition would allow the State Commission

to issues stronger sanctions, such as the ones listed above, whether formal or informal proceedings are

pursued.-YES

Reasoning: This prop. allows the State Commission more flexibility in punishing judges for wrongdoing.

In 2010 a judge escaped punishment for wrongdoing by claiming that the punishments doled out did not

match the type of proceedings the Commission followed. This is wrong and should not be allowed.

Arguments:

Support: This prop. will provide the Commission with adequate tools in pursuing those who abuse their

power and will insure that that it is harder for wrongdoers to avoid punishment. Making the same

penalties available to both types of proceedings will insure that the Commission pursues the available

avenue based on the merits of the particular case before them, and not on the punishments available to

them.

Opposition: The current constitutional provisions are appropriate and needed because they protect the

judiciary from unwarranted scrutiny and aid in the confidentiality of judges. It screens judges from false

allegations by political opponents or those unhappy with a judicial decision. In addition, it insures thatonly the most important cases of alleged judicial misconduct are pursued under formal proceedings. A

lesser concern has also been voiced that the Commission might require more funding because of a

possible increase in formal proceedings as a result of approval of prop. 9.

Texas Ballot Provisions

Documents

Transcript of Texas Ballot Provisions