Today is the first day of early voting for the November 3 Texas Constitutional Amendments election.

The election turnout out will be small, as there are no candidates running and most Texans are not even aware that there is a statewide election next month.

Which means that some small, special interest groups are likely able to influence the vote by putting a little bit of time, money, and effort into getting their members out to vote.

I’ve laid out the amendments below, and how I plan on voting for them.

Much thanks to Michelle Samuelson at the fantastic Texas state politics blog Blue Dot Blues for a wealth of information on what these amendments mean to Texans and Conservatives.

In summary:

• I’m FOR: 2, 5, 6, 7, and 11
• I’m AGAINST: 1, 3, 4, 8, 9, and 10

Propositions to Support

Reforming Property Taxes

Proposition 2 – Vote Yes
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.

Reason for Yes vote:

When appraisal districts determine the value of property for tax purposes, the district can currently base it on what the property could be worth if it were used for a more valuable purpose. Therefore, many homeowners have seen appraisals rise substantially, not because the value of the homes increased, but because the land was deemed more valuable as a different use.

Texas already prohibits agricultural land and timber land from being appraised based on other possible uses, but no similar protection exists for homeowners.

A vote for this amendment will protect citizens’ property from the levy of property taxes on the basis of potential use (resulting in higher taxes) rather than actual use of a property.

Proposition 5 – Vote Yes
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.

Reason for Yes vote:

This proposition would be useful to rural counties with small population.  A vote for this proposition will make government more efficient by allowing smaller counties to pool their resources to accomplish the task of property tax appraisal for those counties who agree to have a single board of equalization.  If the amendment passes, a vote of the people in the affected counties would be required before the single board of equalization could be created.

Helping our Veterans

Proposition 6 - Vote Yes
The constitutional amendment authorizing the Veterans’ Land Board to issue general obligation bonds in amounts equal to or less than amounts previously authorized.

Reason for Yes vote:

This is probably the least controversial proposition on the ballot.

The Veterans Land Board has operated very efficiently over the years.  There has been very low default on bonds issued to support loans to veterans.  A vote for this proposition will make government more efficient by eliminating the necessity for the Veterans Land Board to seek Legislative authority every two years to issue low risk bonds.

Good Government

Proposition 7 – Vote Yes
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.

Reason for Yes vote:

Texas’ Constitution prohibits someone from being compensated for holding more than one civil office. The constitution specifically exempts officers in the United States military and those serving in the National Guard. This amendment would simply clarify/add the officers and enlisted members of the Texas State Guard and other state military forces to the military exemption.

Stopping Eminent Domain Abuse

Proposition 11 – Vote Yes
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.

Reason for Yes vote:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s Kelo v New London decision allowed local governmental entities to take private property for the purpose of economic development, unless the states’ constitutions contain a provision to the contrary. This amendment would add restrictions on the use of eminent domain in Texas, and prohibit legislators from weakening the restrictions without voter approval. Further, it would add important protections against eminent domain abuse by specifically stating the legitimate purposes for eminent domain. Finally, governmental entities taking land through eminent domain would be required to use it for a definable public purpose.

Eminent domain proceedings on blighted property would have to be done on individual parcels of property, and not collectively on large swaths of land — like it was for the building of Jerry Jones new NFL stadium in Dallas.

While I don’t think this amendment is strong enough in limiting the government’s use of eminent domain, it does move in the right direction of further restricting it.

Propositions to Oppose

New Debt

Proposition 1 – Vote No
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.

Reason for No vote:

Would allow local entities to incur debt and raise property taxes in attempts to keep federal installations that may no longer be necessary to the military’s mission or performance.

The Best Government is Local Government

Proposition 3 – Vote No
The constitutional amendment providing for uniform standards and procedures for the appraisal of property for ad valorem tax purposes.

Reason for NO vote:

If passed, this amendment could be used in the future to facilitate “circuit breaking,” the concept of tying property tax rates to property owners’ income levels.  Voting against this proposition will keep control of property appraisal at the local level.  Local governments are best equipped to determine how property should be appraised in their communities.

Inappropriate Spending

Proposition 4 – Vote No
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.

Reason for NO vote:

Proposition 4, if passed, will enlarge the role of government in an area where free enterprise is clearly better suited.  The private market has already shown that it can take care of the nation’s research needs.   Compared to research performed at universities, where federal grant money is often used on projects of questionable value, research performed by the free market is managed more efficiently, with clear objectives and applications for the public good, and is not subsidized by Texas taxpayers and students.

Sadly, this measure is most likely going to pass, as one of the biggest benefactors of it passing will be the University of Houston. Hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign adds are being spent in one market — Houston — mostly from the contributions of Bill Hobby. The likely voter approval in the city of Houston will likely be higher than the total voter turn out in the rest of the state combined.

Which means that the U of Houston is voting themselves our tax dollars.

Proposition 8 – Vote No
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.

Reason for No vote:

The establishment of veterans hospitals is the role of the federal government, not the state. There are currently 9 veterans hospitals in Texas, all of which were established with federal and private funding and without special authority of the Texas Constitution. If additional veterans hospitals are needed, no additional state authority or funding is necessary, as it is the role and responsibility of the federal government to provide these resources.

Possible Infringement On Property Rights

Proposition 9 – Vote No
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.

Reason for No vote:

State law already provides in Chapter 61, Natural Resources Code, for an “open beaches” policy under which the public must have Afree and unrestricted right of ingress and egress to the larger area extending from the line of mean low tide to the line of vegetation bordering on the Gulf of Mexico.@ In effect, the vegetation line marks the property line for private property owners along Texas beaches. The attorney general must enforce the open beaches law strictly to prevent encroachments against public access to beaches. The line of vegetation can shift because of erosion, storms, or construction of seawalls and other manmade barriers. The statute defines how beach boundaries may be determined in areas with no marked line of vegetation, and it defines the line of vegetation in several circumstances, including along the Galveston Seawall.

These laws can be challenged in court when necessary to protect private property rights. The proposed amendment would place the existing law into the constitution, creating a “right” to public beaches. Legal efforts to protect private property rights would be more difficult. A vote against this proposition would preserve private property rights under current law.

Proposition 10 – Vote No
The constitutional amendment to provide that elected members of the governing boards of emergency services districts may serve terms not to exceed four years.

Reason for No vote:

Board members of Emergency Service Districts have the authority to raise local taxes in the districts they represent. Elected officials with taxing authority should remain accountable to the voters through the ballot box. Other elected officials with the power to levy taxes such as state representatives and members of Congress are up for election every two years. Let’s keep it that way for these folks, too.

______

NOTE: the verbiage for the for and against reasons comes almost entirely from either the Heritage Alliance or Empower Texans. They had great summaries, which I almost completely agreed with.