How does paying property taxes to the state help keep the state from taking the property via eminent domain?
I'm not paying any new taxes, I don't give a shit what they dress it up as.
here is a full summary of what's on the table...i asked a friend about it, and apparently jodie laubenberg (a friend of his) had so many people asking about it, that they came up with a press release...i copied and pasted it from a pdf file. a lot of people were making it out to be a new state tax on top of the taxes that you're already paying...that's not true. it's mostly to allow a residence to be taxed based on its use a residence when it can be used as commercial as well, etc...at least, that's the way that i'm reading it.
TEXAS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Constitutional Amendment Election
November 3, 2009
Proposition 1, HJR 132: City and County Bond Authority to Purchase Land around a Military Base
The Ballot will Read: "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."
Summary: Proposition 1 would allow cities and counties to issue bonds to purchase land around a
military base. It would also allow the city or county to raise real or personal property taxes to repay
those bonds. The purchased land could be used to create a buffer zone, or to build infrastructure that
will protect or promote the mission of the military installation.
Supporters Say: This proposal would protect military bases from encroachment and encourage safety
and security for installation’s operations and training. The infrastructure built through the additional
bonds and taxes would likely pay for itself.
Opponents Say: This constitutional amendment would likely lead to higher property taxes. If cities or
counties would like to purchase land around a military base, they should do so within their existing tax
Proposition 2, HJR 36-1: Limits to Home Appraisal Value Determination
The Ballot will Read: "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
Summary: Proposition 2 would provide that taxation of a residential homestead must be based only on
the property’s value as a home, whether or not the property could be used for other purposes.
Supporters Say: Proposition 2 would protect Texas homeowners from high appraisals because they live
in an area that contains commercial development. "Highest and best use" gouges homeowners and can
push people out of their homes. Proposition 2 would put an end to these unreasonably high appraisals.
Opponents Say: Proposition 2 would likely reduce property tax collections and thus reduce tax revenue
for local entities.
LOCAL & CONSENT CALENDARS • NATURAL RESOURCES• PUBLIC HEALTH
P.O. BOX 2910 • AUSTIN, TX 78768-2910 • TEL: 512-463-0186 • FAX: 512-463-5896
EMAIL: [email protected]
Proposition 3, HJR 36-3: Uniform Standards for Property Appraisals
The Ballot will Read: "The constitutional amendment providing for uniform standards and procedures for
the appraisal of property for ad valorem tax purposes."
Summary: Proposition 3 would give the le gislature full discretion to prescribe the administration and
enforcement of uniform standards and procedures for property appraisals.
Supporters Say: Currently, the appraisal standards are left up to individual counties and districts. This
creates a confusing system for homeowners and reduces accountability. Uniform standards would empower
the State to better enforce appraisal standards.
Opponents Say: No apparent opposition.
Proposition 4, HJR 14-2: National Research University Fund
The Ballot will Read: "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
Summary: Proposition 4 would establish the National Research University Fund, which would provide
funds to emerging research universities so that they may obtain national research university status.
Supporters Say: Proposition 4 would pursue the goal of establishing more research level universities. This
will help Texas become more globally competitive. Texas has only two tier-one universities. This fund
will help more Texas universities assume tier-one status.
Opponents Say: Texas has limited resources. Especially given these economic times, Texas must be frugal
and avoid new long-term financial stresses. Higher education dollars should focus on institutions that are
very close to achieving tier-one status, and this can be done through existing appropriations. The proposed
fund would not be an effective use of taxpayer dollars.
Proposition 5, HJR 36-2: Consolidated Appraisal Review Boards
The Ballot will Read: "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
Summary: Proposition 5 would allow rural counties to form consolidated appraisal review boards (ARB).
Supporters Say: Rural communities have trouble finding enough qualified members to sit on an appraisal
board. Allowing these appraisal districts to consolidate their ARBs would ease this burden, and allow more
timely property appraisals.
Opponents Say: No apparent opposition.
Proposition 6, HJR 116: Veterans' Land Board Bonds
The Ballot will Read: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the Veterans’ Land Board to issue
general obligation bonds in amounts equal to or less than amounts previously authorized.”
Summary: Proposition 6, if approved, would allow the Veterans' Land Board (VLB) to issue bonds to
continue to provide home mortgage loans to Texas veterans, without having to seek constitutional
reauthorization every four years. The VLB would only be able to issue bonds in amounts equal or less to the
amounts approved by voters in the last election cycle. Additionally, the amount of bonds allowed to be
issued each year would be capped by federal law at $250 Million each year.
Supporters Say: This amendment will allow the VLB to continue to provide its loan services without
seeking constitutional reauthorization. The bonding authority would still be capped, and so this amendment
would not result in excessive bonding authority.
Opponents Say: In order to maintain transparency and accountability when issuing taxpayer funded debt,
the VLB should see voter approval each time.
Proposition 7, HJR 127: Repeal of the Texas State Guard Prohibition on Holding a Civil Office
The Ballot will Read: "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."
Summary: Proposition 7 would include Texas State Guardsmen in the list of those military officers allowed
to hold civil offices. Currently, all members of the armed forces except the Texas State Guard are allowed
to hold civil office.
Supporters Say: This amendment would merely correct an unintentional oversight in the Constitution,
allowing the Texas State Guard to hold civil office, just like other military members.
Opponents Say: No apparent opposition.
Proposition 8, HJR 7: A Veterans' Hospital in the Rio Grande Valley
The Ballot will Read: "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."
Summary: Proposition 8 would require Texas to solicit federal establishment of a veterans' hospital in the
Rio Grande Valley Region. The proposed hospital would be under federal jurisdiction, but the state would
also contribute money for the establishment and operation of the hospital.
Supporters Say: Proposition 8 would give veterans another full-fledged Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital.
The closest VA hospital for Rio Grande-area veterans is now in San Antonio, which may be a long drive for
some. Veterans have risked their lives for their country and deserve the best and most accessible care.
Opponents Say: The US Department of Veterans Affairs contracted with two Rio Grande Health Systems
in February 2009 to provide inpatient, surgical, emergency, and mental health services to Rio Grande-Area
veterans. These two systems are well equipped to pr
ovide the vital services in close proximity to the
veterans. All veterans have the option to go to San Antonio for hospital treatment. There has not been
significant evidence that another hospital is needed, and so the added expense through federal and state
taxes is not justified.
Proposition 9, HJR 102: Texas Public Beaches
The Ballot will Read: "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."
Summary: Proposition 9 would constitutionally establish the public’s unrestricted right to access public
beaches. Right now, this right is only present in Texas statute.
Supporters Say: This would strengthen the Open Beaches Act, and better ensure that developers do not
block public access to Texas beaches located on the Gulf of Mexico.
Opponents Say: Putting the Open Beaches Act into the Constitution would make it harder for property
owners to challenge abusive implementation. This statute gives the state power to require property owners
whose houses are now located on public land following Hurricane Ike to remove their homes. The state
already has an unreasonable amount of power not just to obstruct development, but to prevent homeowners
from legitimately using their private property. If this measure becomes part of the Constitution, that power
will become unchecked.
Proposition 10, HJR 85: Emergency Service District Board Term Limits
The Ballot will Read: "The constitutional amendment to provide that elected members of the governing
boards of emergency services districts may serve terms not to exceed four years."
Summary: Proposition 10 would allow members of the governing board of an emergency services district
to serve te rms of four years rather than the current maximum of two years.
Supporters Say: Longer terms would promote stability on ESD boards and give the board members more
time to gain experience and improve district emergency services.
Opponents Say: Longer terms would reduce accountability to the people, which is especially important
given that ESD board members have the power to tax.
Proposition 11, HJR 14-1: Restriction on Eminent Domain Powers
The Ballot will Read: "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."
Summary: Proposition 11 would only allow eminent domain in cases where the taking of the land is
necessary for public purposes. The amendment specifically states that the land may not be taken for
additional tax revenues or economic development.
Supporters Say: This amendment will allow greater protection for landowners and homeowners against
unnecessary government land-takings. The amendment will send a strong message that private land should
only be taken for very limited public purposes.
Opponents Say: This amendment does not clearly define what constitutes justified eminent domain
proceedings. This vague language could lead to a various judicial interpretations, and thus subject
taxpayers to court costs.