I have taken the time to look over and study the Constitutional Amendments that will be on this Novembers ballot. I decided to share my findings here on my blog for those interested in learning more. I welcome your feedback in the form of comments, questions, disagreement, agreement or just general feedback.

As far as the Constitutional Amendments are concerned:

Proposition 1 – This is an ad valorem tax exemption for the surviving spouse of a member of the United States armed services who is killed in action. Pros: Most of the time, the surviving family members are emotionally and financially devastated from losing their primary bread winner’s income. This amendment is Texas’ way of relieving some of that loss. If passed, the financial impact would be borne by those with more property. Cons: If passed, the financial impact would be borne by those with more property. Also, some smaller local governments may be more impacted fiscally than others. And, some taxing jurisdictions may feel the need to raise taxes on the non-tax-exempt property owners to offset the cost of this amendment. Opponents to this amendment may point out the loss of tax income to the local taxing authorities.

Analysis: This is the right thing to do for our veterans and their families.

Proposition 2 – This is a cleanup amendment that eliminates the constitutional requirement for a State Medical Education Board and a State Medical Education Fund. Pros: Since neither board is in operation and no new loans have been made in 25 years, removing them from the Texas Constitution makes sense. Cons: None.

Analysis: This is a good example of government programs that are being eliminated.

Proposition 3 – This is a specific amendment that relieves the tax burden on the aircraft industry where aircraft parts are stored in Texas for long periods of time. Pros: The current tax situation appears to negatively affect the aircraft industry more than other large industries. Since other states do not tax the aircraft industry in this way, Texas will remain competitive by the passage of this amendment. Note: In order to actually implement the tax savings, the local taxing authority would have to have a separate vote on the issue. Cons: Opponents to this amendment may point out the loss of tax income to the local taxing authorities.

Analysis: Part of the reason for Texas’ economic success is that its’ economy is so widely diversified. This is a pro-business amendment. We want the aircraft manufacturing, parts manufacturing and storage of those parts here in Texas. Eliminating and reducing taxes is always a good thing; however, other Texas industries are also adversely affected by the very same tax.

Proposition 4 – This is another veteran friendly amendment. This amendment allows a partially disabled veteran or the surviving spouse of that veteran to get a pro-rated/partial exemption for the property value of a home that was donated to the veteran or their family by a charitable organization. Keep in mind that the homes being donated to these returning veterans are done so without taxpayer money. Pros: As noted in Proposition 1, returning disabled or partially disabled veterans and their families are likely dealing with a huge emotional and financial loss. The partial elimination of the ad valorem tax will ease the financial burdens by the affected families. If passed, the financial impact would be borne by those with more property. Cons: If passed, the financial impact would be borne by those with more property. Some smaller local governments may be more impacted fiscally than others. Some taxing jurisdictions may feel the need to raise taxes on the non-tax-exempt property owners. Opponents to this amendment may point out the loss of tax income to the local taxing authorities.

Analysis: This is the right thing to do for our veterans and their families.

Proposition 5 – This amendment allows the use of the reverse mortgage to purchase a homestead property. It also changes certain lending disclosures and other issues that arise in the lending process. One of those changes would allow lenders to sue borrowers who fail to promptly occupy those homes. Pros: For those seniors who are house rich, but cash poor, the reverse mortgage is an opportunity for them to downsize their current home. A reverse mortgage can be a very useful tool to have “one” transaction that covers the sale of the first home and the purchase of the second home. Cons: Before 1997, there were limits on how far a person’s homestead could be encumbered. Under this amendment, the homestead exemption can be furthered voluntarily encumbered by the property owner.

Analysis: Even as a kid, I understood and “got” the idea of Texas’ homestead exemption. My gut tells me that whittling away at that exemption even in a cleanup amendment is not a good idea. As I see it, more government interference should always be looked at with a jaundiced eye. The proposed amendment would require the lender and borrower/applicants for a reverse mortgage to get financial counseling to see if this is a good transaction. On a rare occasion, there is an issue that you just do not know what to do with. For me, this is one of those occasions.

Proposition 6 – This constitutional amendment provides for the creation of the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas and the State Water Implementation Revenue Fund. This is one amendment that is not easily summarized. I highly recommend that everyone would read the Texas Legislative Council’s publication “Analyses of Proposed Constitutional Amendments.” The link is at the bottom of this page.The purpose of these programs is to insure that Texas will always have a viable water supply for the future. As described, the amendment authorizes the Legislature to transfer funds from the Rainy Day fund to these newly created funds. Once funded, these new funds would be used to back state water projects in the state water plan. Pros: The water issue needs to be dealt with now and tapping the rainy day fund is necessary to deal with this issue. Even though the rainy day fund will be tapped, proponents argue that the state’s credit rating will not be harmed. Cons: Opponents agree that there is a pressing need to deal with the state’s water issues. Most of the opponents’ arguments against this measure center upon the organizational structure and funding mechanism in support of the water measure. Opponents argue that Texas does not need another government program to tell the state how to deal with and administer water. Other arguments against the amendment include: a). Tapping the rainy day fund will be habit forming. Once tapped the first time, it will be easier to tap the second time. And, then there is the third and fourth time. b). Tapping the rainy day fund could harm our credit rating. No one knows for sure what proposals will be eventually adopted and funded or how much they will cost. c). Resorting to tapping this fund was unnecessary. The state would have had plenty of money in the general fund to deal with the water issue and all of the other items on the budget had they started their budget projections with water first.

Analysis: No one argues about the need for water for Texas’ future. The presented Proposition is the water solution that is on the table.

Proposition 7 – This amendment provides for the option of a home-rule municipality to amend its’ charter to allow the governing body to fill an unexpired vacancy on that body if there are 12 months or less remaining within that term. Pros: This would save taxpayer money from having to have a special election if there is a vacancy on the governing board. Cons: Some could argue that if appointments are made, local governments would have less accountability and that the municipality could be at risk for corruption and cronyism.

Analysis: Since the amendment only provides for the opportunity for home-rule municipalities to change their charters to allow for this change, the opportunities for corruption and cronyism are small.

Proposition 8 – This is the second of two specific amendments that deal with very specific issues. This amendment repeals the current Texas Constitution’s maximum tax rate for a Hidalgo County hospital. This amendment would only affect those owning property within that jurisdiction. The current tax rate for Hidalgo County is much lower than the rest of the state. The amendment would put Hidalgo County on par with all other Texas counties. Additionally, local voters would have to separately approve a tax increase. If the local voters decide to give themselves a tax increase, the tax increase would be used to fund a hospital. Pros: This proposed amendment originated from the local Hidalgo county elected officials. There is no hospital district in Hidalgo County. The measure would provide an opportunity for the local voters to fund a hospital. Cons: Opponents to this amendment may complain about the higher taxes that will be passed. Also, it is interesting to note that you may be a property owner in the county and not necessarily be a voter. Thus, it is conceivable that your taxes may go up and you cannot vote to stop it.

Analysis: This is a local issue to Hidalgo County. Most people think that the local people should be allowed to govern themselves in a way that deem appropriate.

Proposition 9 – The State Commission on Judicial Conduct handles all complaints against a Texas judge or justice. Currently, if formal, public proceedings are filed against a jurist, there are only three possible actions against an alleged misbehaving jurist: 1. No action, 2. Public reprimand, and 3). Removal/retirement. This amendment expands the types of sanctions that may be assessed against a jurist. Pros: Allegations of judicial misconduct are common. But the range of what constitutes misconduct ranges from minor to very extreme. Most of the other states’ Judicial Commissions have similar options that are being sought here. This change allows more light to be shown on judicial conduct that is in question. This amendment gives the Commission more latitude to by giving the Commission a wider range of enforcement provisions. Proponents argue that the Commission can handle more complaints in a more efficient manner if they have a more options to choose from. Proponents also point out that the range of sanctions proposed are the same sanctions that are in place for private informal actions against jurists. Cons: Opponents to the measure correctly point out that anyone can complain to the Commission for anything and they usually do. “Sour grapes” complaints and complaints with no basis of fact are filed all of the time against jurisits. Further, what is perceived to be a violation by the person filing the complaint is not always a violation of the judicial cannon of ethics. And, no matter how silly a complaint looks on its’ face, all complaints received by the Commission must be thoroughly reviewed by the Commission. Any complaint filed against a jurist requires the jurist to take hours of time to respond to the complaint. Opponents point out that there will be even more bureaucracy and more work for them if this measure is passed. Opponents also point out that anything less than a removal or retirement of a jurist weakens the Commission’s authority in that the severity of the bad conduct necessary to get rid of bad jurists will be increased.

Analysis: This is one amendment that I did a double take on. My original assessment was favorable to back the amendment. But, after talking to others involved in the Texas court system, I picked up more of the arguments against passing the amendment. They made a persuasive case that voting against the amendment was the best action. However, as an attorney and as a litigant, I am not entirely persuaded by their argument. I understand the difference between being home towned by a sitting jurist and being abused by the court system. It is persuasive to me that there are severe allegations of people being abused by a sitting judge in the Beaumont area.

As far as the Proposition from Midland Independent School District, here is their proposition:

This proposition authorizes the MISD Trustees to purchase attendance credits from the state with local tax revenues. Specifically, this proposition deals with the issues of the imbalance between the Midland County Property Values and the Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) within MISD jurisdiction. Because MISD has an “excess” taxable value in relation to its’ “low” WADA, there is a funding imbalance. If this proposition is not passed, the imbalance will be taken care of by a permanent severing of MISD property values from MISD and be given to another independent school district. One way to avoid the severance is for MISD to increase its’ WADA credits by purchasing extra WADA credits from the state. MISD trustees have chosen the purchase option as a means to avoid the severance. The proposition will authorize MISD to spend about $12,800,000 to purchase those credits. Pros: The bill that created this weird mechanism is not called “Robin Hood” for nothing. MISD is truly in a “use it or lose it” situation. If the voters do not approve this measure, Midland property owners’ tax assessment for school values will forever be joined to another school district. Cons: Midland property owners are going to give $12,800,000 to another school district and are not going to get any direct benefit from that $12,800,000.

Analysis: Either way, Midland is losing because of the Robin Hood bill. Again, if Midland’s property values are severed from the MISD, MISD will never get them back.

Here is a generic ballot. The Secretary of State provided these explanations of the nine amendments to the Texas constitutions here. And the Legislative Reference Library has done an analysis here. Further comments on Proposition 6 can be found here.

Sharing is good...