2015 Proposed Constitutional Amendments, TEXAS

Carlos H Cascos - Secretary of State | self

[Svartalfiar]

So, a couple days ago I received a letter in the mail from our SecState, explaining the proposed constitutional amendments that will be appearing on the Nov 3 ballot. Searching FR for 'Texas proposition' I got one hit for a single article about the 2014 proposed amendment. Throwing this up here to get some discussion from fellow Texans in time for the ballot here in a couple months. The letter adds some somewhat more normal English wording to explain each one, but that's a lot of typing (and a ton more formatting), so I just copied over the actual wording. Can't find the letter online at all.

Proposition 1 (SJR 1)
“The constitutional amendment increasing the amount of the residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxation for public school purposes from $15,000 to $25,000, providing for a reduction of the limitation on the total amount of ad valorem taxes that may be imposed for those purposes on the homestead of an elderly or disabled person to reflect the increased exemption amount, authorizing the legislature to prohibit a political subdivision that has adopted an optional residence homestead exemption from ad valorem taxation from reducing the amount of or repealing the exemption, and prohibiting the enactment of a law that imposes a transfer tax on a transaction that conveys fee simple title to real property.”

Proposition 2 (HJR 75)
“The constitutional amendment 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 100 percent or totally disabled veteran who died before the law authorizing a residence homestead exemption for such a veteran took effect.”

Proposition 3 (SJR 52)
“The constitutional amendment repealing the requirement that state officers elected by voters statewide reside in the state capital.”

Proposition 4 (HJR 73)
“The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit professional sports team charitable foundations to conduct charitable raffles.”

Proposition 5 (SJR 17)
“The constitutional amendment to authorize counties with a population of 7,500 or less to perform private road construction and maintenance.”

Proposition 6 (SJR 22)
“The constitutional amendment recognizing the right of the people to hunt, fish, and harvest wildlife subject to laws that promote wildlife conservation.”

Proposition 7 (SJR 5)
“The constitutional amendment dedicating certain sales and use tax revenue and motor vehicle sales, use, and rental tax revenue to the state highway fund to provide funding for nontolled roads and the reduction of certain transportation-related debt.”



And here's a link to the Texas Legislative Council's page that has a pdf/word link giving an analyses of each proposal.

[smokingfrog]

Seems pretty straightforward, but thanks for the heads-up. ⚠️

[humblegunner]

You list “self” as the author.
Therefor you must be Carlos H Cascos - Secretary of State.. correct?

[PAR35]

If I understand these:

Amend. 1 is for transferring wealth from old folks to younger homeowners - raise the general exemption, but reduce the old folks exemption.

Amendment 2 is a special retroactive provision to provide a benefit to a very small number of folks whose spouses died before the effective date of a prior amendment. Negligible financial impact.

Amendment 3 appears to be straightforward

Amendment 4 is a foot in the door to permit gambling at professional sporting events. Because, let’s face it - Jerry Jones needs the money.

Amendment 5 lets rich folks in rural counties use taxpayer money to maintain their internal ranch roads and driveways. Because they are entitled.

Amendment 6 was basically meaningless pandering to the sportsmen and women. Doesn’t really do anything.

Amendment 7, on the other hand, puts highway money back toward the highways instead of unrelated pet projects of corrupt politicians. But the trick language shows that it really to make sure sure that the bankers get their interest paid, after the voters were stupid enough to approve highway debt a few years ago.

Anything I missed?

[Vermont Lt]

Y’all have a lot of stuff in your constitution.

[bgill]

Guessing that $250 property tax reduction Abbott promised didn’t quite work out for us tax payers who are barely hanging on.

[ken in texas]

Are you sure you got Amend. 1 right?. It looks like the school exemption is increased for the elderly or disabled, not decreased.

[thackney]

Ammend 1

providing for a reduction of the limitation on the total amount of ad valorem taxes that may be imposed for those purposes on the homestead of an elderly or disabled person to reflect the increased exemption amount

This is to give the elderly or disabled the SAME increased exemption.

- - - - - -

Ammend 5

Gives authority to County Government, not individuals or families.

The population limitation is necessary to prevent populous counties from competing with the private road construction industry. However, in the rural counties that would be covered by the proposed amendment, there are no private industries with which to compete, and counties should be allowed to deal with minor projects to maintain road safety.

- - - - - -

http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/pubsconamend/analyses15/analyses15.pdf

[thackney]

You are correct

[PAR35]

They always try to be obtuse to hide what they are doing. If there is a limitation on total taxes for old and disabled, and you reduce that limitation, aren’t you raising the taxation on them? As thackney notes in 8, it is to give the elderly and disabled the same as everyone else. They currently are getting a better deal than everyone else, so if you make it all the same, seems like it is hurting the old folks.

Amendment 5 is clearly about private roads, not public roads. And it is authorizing taxpayer money to do so.

[thackney]

Ammend 1 is not reducing the limit on total taxes. They are reducing the limit on exemptions taken off the their total taxes. This is allowing the same ADDITONAL $10,000 exemption to be added to the elderly and disabled, as well as the homestead.

Ammend 5 authorizes no taxpayer money, only enlarging the size of the county from 5,000 to 7,500 population. This already is permitted in counties under 5,000 people. That is the only change, increase the population limit, provided the county is paid for the work.

You really should go read that link.

http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/pubsconamend/analyses15/analyses15.pdf

[thackney]

Abbott signs $4 billion, two-year tax cuts package
http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/06/abbott-signs-4-billion-two-year-tax-cuts-package.html/

The tax-cut package includes a proposed property tax break worth about $125 a year for the average Texas homeowner. The increase in the homestead exemption on school property taxes, though, still must be approved by voters.

[PAR35]

Thanks. I know they try to twist up the language in the amendments to hide the real purpose, so I always try to put the worst spin possible on the reading to try to get to what is really going on.

[TropicanaRose]

H-town Freepers, who’re we voting for for mayor? I think I have voted for Adrian Garcia in the past. Just got a flyer in the mail from Bill King & it looks like he’s got a few good endorsements. Costello voted for the HERO (bathroom) ordinance so he won’t get my vote. Chris Bell no way. Oliver Pennington is my city councilman & he voted my way on HERO so I’m inclined to reward him for that, but he does have a challenger who seems to be saying the right things.

[Jane Long]

.

[Jane Long]

;-)

[Svartalfiar]

Um, my first and last name both start with Rs, if that’s close enough?

And yes, the post itself I wrote. The proposal texts is what is going to appear on the ballot, which I doubt was specifically written by Mr. C.

[Svartalfiar]

The tax-cut package includes a proposed property tax break worth about $125 a year for the average Texas homeowner. The increase in the homestead exemption on school property taxes, though, still must be approved by voters.

Correct. The tax cuts and related stuff goes through the Legislature. The homestead exemption, however, is Constitutional, not general code, and therefore requires a Constitutional amendment. Not just a simple TX Legislature/Gov signature.

[Svartalfiar]

Anything I missed? - - - Eh, a couple things.

1 - including other posts, it looks to raise the amount of exemption everyone can claim, while lowering the max amount elderly/disabled can claim. This only should hit those that already max out exemptions for ad valorem taxes, so unless I misunderstand something, few people will see an overall reduction in exemptions. Most people (including elderly) will be able to increase their exemption as they are included in the 15-25k exemption increase.

2 - Yes, it was applicable to some recently dead veterans' spouses, this just expands that exemption to spouses of veterans who died before 2011.

3 - Yup.

4 - Yes, most likely.

5 - 100% wrong. Currently, any county that has <5,000 population can be involved in construct/maintain private roads, as long as they impose a reasonable charge for that work. This amendment simply raises the threshold to 7,500. Either way, it's not taxpayer dollars building the roads, the counties still have to charge for the work.

6 - Yea, part of the big anti-anti-2A push. Kinda pointless, really.

7 - I didn't know motor vehicle-related taxes weren't already earmarked for the SHF, but yep, just taking some random sales tax percentage for the SHF seems to imply that someone isn't quite spending their funding very well.

[humblegunner]

Yet you credit yourself as the author of the content.