2019 Elections: Texans Reject Constitutional Amendment On Municipal Judges, Approve Nine Others | KERA News

2019 Elections: Texans Reject Constitutional Amendment On Municipal Judges, Approve Nine Others

Oct 21, 2019
Originally published on November 6, 2019 1:13 pm

Texans voted on 10 constitutional amendments this Election Day. The propositions ranged from prohibiting an income tax from ever being collected in the state to allowing law enforcement animals to stay with their handlers when they retire.

Here's how residents voted and what the propositions mean, with an assist from the League of Women Voters.

 * Failed — 65% against and 35% for

What was on the ballot: “The constitutional amendment permitting a person to hold more than one office as a municipal judge at the same time.”

What it means:  The amendment would have closed a gap in the Texas Constitution. Under state law, elected municipal judges aren’t allowed to hold a judgeship in another city at the same time – while appointed judges can. As the Texas House Research Organization points out, the idea is to make it easier for rural communities with few qualified judges to recruit them from elsewhere.

RELATED | 2019 Election Results: Austinites Reject Local Propositions; Measure On Expo Center Passes

The passage could have led to an erosion of the one-person, one-office rule, however, and, if judges are spread too thin across too many courts, it could jeopardize their ability to preside over a court.

  * Passed — 65% for and 35% against

What was on the ballot:  The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of additional general obligation bonds by the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) in an amount not to exceed $200 million to provide financial assistance for the development of certain projects in economically distressed areas."

What it means: The board issues these bonds to help local governments develop sewer and water supply services in economically distressed areas. Voters green-lit $250 million for funding in 1989, with an additional $250 million approved in 2007. With the amendment passing, bonds issued by the board will not be able to exceed $200 million.

  * Passed — 85% for and 15% against

 

What was on the ballot: “The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for a temporary exemption from ad valorem taxation of a portion of the appraised value of certain property damaged by a disaster.”

What it means: The law allows homeowners to receive a temporary exemption from some property taxes if their homes or businesses are in a disaster area, as declared by the governor. The amount of the exemption is based on damage assessments from FEMA or other sources, according to the Texas House Research Organization. Supporters of the amendment say it provides a less expensive and easier to understand method of property appraisals following disasters.

Critics contend it would deprive cities and counties of revenue at a time when they have to provide much-needed services after a disaster. Still other critics believe the legislation does not go far enough to help taxpayers after a disaster.

  * Passed — 74% for and 26% against

 

What was on the ballot: "The constitutional amendment prohibiting the imposition of an individual income tax, including a tax on an individual’s share of partnership and unincorporated association income."

What it means: Proposition 4 forbids future legislatures from imposing an income tax on residents. The Texas Constitution already requires an income tax be approved by voters, but this proposition would remove even that possibility.

Critics point out that this is unnecessary because of the existing law. Eliminating an income tax could make it more difficult for the state government to fund schools, roads and other services in unknown future economic conditions.

Supporters say it confirms the state’s reputation as being a low-tax, pro-growth place to do business. They say the lack of income tax has been a factor in the state’s economic expansion.

  * Passed — 88% for and 12% against

 

What was on the ballot:  “The constitutional amendment dedicating the revenue received from the existing state sales and use taxes that are imposed on sporting goods to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and the Texas Historical Commission to protect Texas’ natural areas, water quality, and history by acquiring, managing, and improving state and local parks and historic sites while not increasing the rate of the state sales and use taxes.”

What it means: Under state law, tax revenue from the sale of sporting goods in Texas is supposed to help fund Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and the Texas Historical Commission. But that hasn't been happening. Between 1993 and 2017, only 40 percent of that revenue has gone to the parks department, with much of the rest allocated elsewhere by state lawmakers. That's one reason the agency has an estimated $800 million backlog of deferred maintenance.

Proposition 5 comes close to ensuring the money goes to the parks department and historical commission. Lawmakers are still given a little wiggle room; the amendment says they can temporarily re-allocate funds during a legislative session with a two-thirds majority vote.

  * Passed — 64% for and 36% against

 

What was on the ballot: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to increase by $3 billion the maximum bond amount authorized for the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas."

What it means: In short, this allows the state to increase the bond that pays for the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, or CPRIT, from $3 billion to $6 billion.

Cancer is a leading cause of death in Texas and the country. CPRIT was created to fund research and prevention programs across the state aimed at reducing deaths. Some programs funded by CPRIT have even been cited in academic journals as effective ways of increasing cancer screening in remote areas of the state, where screening is always more difficult.

CPRIT has been embroiled in controversy over how it spends taxpayer money, however. In 2012, it was found to have doled out $11 million without review, leading to the indictment of a former executive. CPRIT also has been dogged by questions over whether all the money spent over the years has yielded enough results.

 * Passed — 74% for and 26% against

What was on the ballot: “The constitutional amendment allowing increased distributions to the available school fund.”

What it means: Current law says this fund can distribute $300 million a year to schools around the state; this amendment increases that to $600 million a year. This amendment in in response to legislation passed in the 2019 session increasing funding for schools.

While proponents applaud more money going to schools, critics say there's no proof more money means better educational outcomes for students.

  * Passed — 78% for and 22% against

 

What was on the ballot: “The constitutional amendment providing for the creation of the flood infrastructure fund to assist in the financing of drainage, flood mitigation, and flood control projects.”

What it means: Prop 8 creates the Flood Infrastructure Fund, a special bank account run by the state. It would provide grants or low-cost loans to local governments to help finance “drainage, flood mitigation, or flood control projects.” Voter approval of the amendment also automatically moves $793 million from the state’s rainy day fund" to the new fund to start paying for projects.

The proposition is in response to severe storms and flooding that have hit the state over the past several years. After Hurricane Harvey, Gov. Greg Abbott convened a special commission to look at how best to rebuild. While never mentioning climate change, the commission called for the state to “future proof” itself against increasing severe weather.

  * Passed — 52% for and 48% against

 

What was on the ballot: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to exempt from ad valorem taxation precious metal held in a precious metal depository located in this state.”

What it means: Gold or other income-producing precious metals held at depositories in the state will not be taxed.

Supporters of the proposition say the law allows state depositories to compete on a level playing field with depositories in other states that do not tax deposits. For instance, the Texas Bullion Depository under construction in Leander would have similar tax laws for its depositors as Fort Knox or other depositories. The law, in effect, makes precious metals equivalent to storing cash, which is generally not subject to ad valorem taxes.

Critics say tax exemptions should not be used to incentivize economic behavior or to pick winners in the marketplace.

  * Passed — 94% for and 6% against

 

What was on the ballot: “The constitutional amendment to allow the transfer of a law enforcement animal to a qualified caretaker in certain circumstances.”

What it means: State law classifies law enforcement animals – like dogs and horses – as property. The state constitution doesn’t allow the government to transfer property to private citizens for free, so currently the animals are auctioned off.

Proposition 10 allows retired animals to be given to their handlers or other qualified caretakers, as long as it's in the animal’s best interest. Many of the animals have lived with their handlers during their years of service.

The bill passed with overwhelming support in both the House and Senate.

This post has been updated with election results.

Copyright 2019 KUT 90.5. To see more, visit KUT 90.5.