|
|
 |
Tuesday
March 16, 2010 Since 1922 |
Election 2009: Propositions 1, 5 and 6
From staff reports
Baytown Sun Published October 31, 2009 (Editor’s note: This is the last in a series of excerpts from the Texas Legislative Council's analysis of the amendments. These will include what supporters and opponents of the proposals have said. The comments were made about the proposed amendment during the legislative process and generally summarize the main arguments supporting or opposing the amendment.)
Amendment No. 1
(H.J.R. 132)
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: The proposed amendment would add Section 52k to Article III, Texas Constitution, to allow the legislature by general law to authorize a municipality or county to issue bonds or notes to finance the acquisition 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. The amendment would allow a municipality or county to pledge increases in property tax revenues imposed in the area by the municipality, county, or other political subdivisions for repayment of the bonds or notes.
• Comments by supporters: Military installations must be protected from encroaching development that could restrict training and operational missions and ultimately cause a military installation to close. Acquiring buffer areas or open spaces adjacent to a military installation to prevent encroachment also would facilitate the construction of infrastructure to protect or promote the mission of the military installation.
• Comments by Opponents: Authorizing municipalities and counties to issue bonds to build infrastructure to protect or promote the mission of a military installation and to pledge increases in property taxes to repay those bonds could result in a higher tax burden on already distressed property owners.
Amendment No. 5
(H.J.R. 36, Article 2)
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.
• Summary: Section 18(b), Article VIII, Texas Constitution, requires the legislature to provide by law for a single appraisal within each county of all property subject to property taxation by the various taxing units located in that county. That subsection permits the legislature to authorize appraisals outside a county when political subdivisions are situated in more than one county or when two or more counties elect to consolidate appraisal services. Section 18(c), Article VIII, requires the legislature to provide for a single board of equalization for each appraisal entity consisting of qualified residents of the territory appraised by the appraisal entity. The proposed amendment would allow the legislature to authorize a single board of equalization for two or more adjoining appraisal entities that elect to provide for consolidated equalizations.
• Comments by Supporters: The proposed constitutional amendment and its enabling legislation, House Bill 3611, Acts of the 81st Legislature, Regular Session, 2009, would allow two or more adjoining appraisal districts, if they so opt, to consolidate appraisal review board functions. Participation on an appraisal review board requires both the willingness to serve and the expertise to serve. The ability to consolidate appraisal review boards would benefit rural counties that have a relatively small pool of qualified persons from which to draw and have difficulty finding qualified appraisal review board members. The proposed amendment is permissive. Combining appraisal review boards would be allowed but not required, empowering appraisal districts to pursue whatever course on appraisal review board composition best fits local needs.
Comments by Opponents: The proposed amendment should go further to address consolidation issues. Wherever consolidation of property tax systems might prove beneficial to rural counties, it would be beneficial generally for all operations, both appraisal and review, enabling efficiencies and reducing not only appraisal review board recruitment requirements but also appraisal district staff requirements. If the legislature and Texas voters want to encourage consolidation, they should encourage both appraisal district consolidation and appraisal review board consolidation in tandem.
Amendment No. 6 (H.J.R. 116)
The constitutional amendment authorizing the Veterans' Land Board to issue general obligation bonds in amounts equal to or less than amounts previously authorized.
• Summary: The proposed amendment would amend Section 49-b(w) to authorize the VLB to provide for, issue, and sell general obligation bonds of the state for the purpose of selling land to Texas veterans or providing them home or land mortgage loans. The proposed amendment would remove a $500 million cap on the principal amount of bonds outstanding at any one time and instead require that the principal amount of outstanding VLB bonds provided, issued, or sold for those purposes at all times be equal to or less than the aggregate principal amount of state general obligation bonds previously authorized for those purposes by prior constitutional amendments.
• Comments by supporters: The proposed amendment would provide the secure and sufficient bonding authority needed by the VLB to continue the Veterans' Housing Assistance Program and Veterans' Land Program. Federal tax law prohibits the board from issuing more than $250 million in qualified veterans mortgage bonds per year, and the board expects its current remaining authorization (approximately $80 million of unused general obligation bonding authority) to last through the end of 2009.
• Comments by Opponents: No comments opposing the amendment were made during the hearings or during discussion of the amendment Legislature. A review of other sources also revealed no apparent opposition to the amendment.
Baytown Sun Published October 31, 2009 (Editor’s note: This is the last in a series of excerpts from the Texas Legislative Council's analysis of the amendments. These will include what supporters and opponents of the proposals have said. The comments were made about the proposed amendment during the legislative process and generally summarize the main arguments supporting or opposing the amendment.)
Amendment No. 1
(H.J.R. 132)
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: The proposed amendment would add Section 52k to Article III, Texas Constitution, to allow the legislature by general law to authorize a municipality or county to issue bonds or notes to finance the acquisition 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. The amendment would allow a municipality or county to pledge increases in property tax revenues imposed in the area by the municipality, county, or other political subdivisions for repayment of the bonds or notes.
• Comments by supporters: Military installations must be protected from encroaching development that could restrict training and operational missions and ultimately cause a military installation to close. Acquiring buffer areas or open spaces adjacent to a military installation to prevent encroachment also would facilitate the construction of infrastructure to protect or promote the mission of the military installation.
• Comments by Opponents: Authorizing municipalities and counties to issue bonds to build infrastructure to protect or promote the mission of a military installation and to pledge increases in property taxes to repay those bonds could result in a higher tax burden on already distressed property owners.
Amendment No. 5
(H.J.R. 36, Article 2)
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.
• Summary: Section 18(b), Article VIII, Texas Constitution, requires the legislature to provide by law for a single appraisal within each county of all property subject to property taxation by the various taxing units located in that county. That subsection permits the legislature to authorize appraisals outside a county when political subdivisions are situated in more than one county or when two or more counties elect to consolidate appraisal services. Section 18(c), Article VIII, requires the legislature to provide for a single board of equalization for each appraisal entity consisting of qualified residents of the territory appraised by the appraisal entity. The proposed amendment would allow the legislature to authorize a single board of equalization for two or more adjoining appraisal entities that elect to provide for consolidated equalizations.
• Comments by Supporters: The proposed constitutional amendment and its enabling legislation, House Bill 3611, Acts of the 81st Legislature, Regular Session, 2009, would allow two or more adjoining appraisal districts, if they so opt, to consolidate appraisal review board functions. Participation on an appraisal review board requires both the willingness to serve and the expertise to serve. The ability to consolidate appraisal review boards would benefit rural counties that have a relatively small pool of qualified persons from which to draw and have difficulty finding qualified appraisal review board members. The proposed amendment is permissive. Combining appraisal review boards would be allowed but not required, empowering appraisal districts to pursue whatever course on appraisal review board composition best fits local needs.
Comments by Opponents: The proposed amendment should go further to address consolidation issues. Wherever consolidation of property tax systems might prove beneficial to rural counties, it would be beneficial generally for all operations, both appraisal and review, enabling efficiencies and reducing not only appraisal review board recruitment requirements but also appraisal district staff requirements. If the legislature and Texas voters want to encourage consolidation, they should encourage both appraisal district consolidation and appraisal review board consolidation in tandem.
Amendment No. 6 (H.J.R. 116)
The constitutional amendment authorizing the Veterans' Land Board to issue general obligation bonds in amounts equal to or less than amounts previously authorized.
• Summary: The proposed amendment would amend Section 49-b(w) to authorize the VLB to provide for, issue, and sell general obligation bonds of the state for the purpose of selling land to Texas veterans or providing them home or land mortgage loans. The proposed amendment would remove a $500 million cap on the principal amount of bonds outstanding at any one time and instead require that the principal amount of outstanding VLB bonds provided, issued, or sold for those purposes at all times be equal to or less than the aggregate principal amount of state general obligation bonds previously authorized for those purposes by prior constitutional amendments.
• Comments by supporters: The proposed amendment would provide the secure and sufficient bonding authority needed by the VLB to continue the Veterans' Housing Assistance Program and Veterans' Land Program. Federal tax law prohibits the board from issuing more than $250 million in qualified veterans mortgage bonds per year, and the board expects its current remaining authorization (approximately $80 million of unused general obligation bonding authority) to last through the end of 2009.
• Comments by Opponents: No comments opposing the amendment were made during the hearings or during discussion of the amendment Legislature. A review of other sources also revealed no apparent opposition to the amendment.