Lois W. Kolkhorst

October 19, 2009

Dear Friends,

This week early voting starts for the November 3 Constitutional Amendment Election, when the voters of our state will have the chance to vote on eleven amendments to our Texas Constitution.   As I've said many times before, power should flow from the people to the government, and not the other way around.   Therefore, I hope you will take the time to vote on these amendments, which attempt to reign in aggressive property tax appraisals, protect property rights, and help our military bases and the brave souls who serve our nation.

There is a misleading email being passed around, written about some of the propositions, specifically 2 & 3. I want to clear the air about these issues, and let you know that these amendments will not create a new state property tax or any framework to create one.   In fact, Proposition 2 is written to fight aggressive property tax appraisal techniques, and it is likely that someone or some group which currently benefit from aggressively appraising a homestead as commercial property want to stop Proposition 2.

It's very easy to intentionally mislead folks on the internet, and I encourage you to actually read the text of the amendment to see for yourself.   I personally plan to vote for all of the amendments, although a few could be argued either way.   To help you make your own decisions, I prepared the synopsis below. You can also go to www.tlc.state.tx.us/pubsconamend/analyses09/analyses09.pdf for more info.

With Warmest Regards,

Rep. Lois W. Kolkhorst

Amendment No. 1 (based on H.J.R. 132)

As Ballot Reads:

"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."

Pros: Military installations in Texas need to be protected from encroaching development that could ultimately cause a military installation to close. Ensuring the viability of military installations is a worthy investment in the economic stability and security of many local communities and the state.

Cons: Authorizing local governments with military bases such as Bexar County to issue bonds to build infrastructure to protect or promote the mission of a military installation and to pledge property taxes to repay those bonds could result in a higher tax burden on already distressed property owners in the area of the military base.

Amendment No. 2 (based on H.J.R. 36)

As Ballot Reads:

"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."

Pros: This is a badly needed restriction on aggressive appraisals, and resembles restrictions that already apply to agricultural and open-space land. Texas already agricultural and open-space land properties from large local appraisal increases resulting from consideration of "the highest and best use." If this amendment passes, the law will similarly protect your homestead. The amendment DOES NOT CREATE A NEW STATE PROPERTY TAX. If passed, this will provide protection to homeowners whose neighborhoods are in transition from residential to commercial developments. It will require taxation of property based solely on property's value as a residence, regardless of whether that use is considered to be the "highest and best use" of the property. Many homeowners throughout the state have experienced artificially aggressive appraisal values, in some instances more than 200 percent in one year, due to the appraisal practice known as "highest and best use," which this amendment outlaws. The amendment would apply only to residence homesteads and not to second homes or investment properties.

Cons: Allowing a homestead to be valued based solely on its use as a home, rather than on the highest and best use, could reduce the amount of local taxable property, and thus reduce revenues available to local government taxing entities like cities, counties or schools.

Amendment No. 3 (based on H.J.R. 36)

As Ballot Reads:

"The constitutional amendment providing for uniform standards and procedures for the appraisal of property for ad valorem tax purposes."

Pros: Property tax practices vary across the state, which can lead to aggressive appraisals. This amendment provides for the administration and enforcement of uniform standards on appraisal districts. It leaves the actual appraisal of property at the local level.

Cons: No uniform standards are needed by local taxing entities.

Amendment No. 4 (based on H.J.R. 14)

As Ballot Reads:

"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."

Pros: Texas lags behind other states in the number of research universities, with only two public research universities of national prominence—The University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University. Texas must continue strengthening these existing universities, and it also must focus resources on establishing additional research universities. Creating additional national research universities in Texas would help us achieve a globally competitive workforce.

Cons: The amendment is well intentioned, but state resources are limited. Given the need to develop more nationally competitive research universities, it would make more sense to focus on a few universities that are already further along the path to national status.

Amendment No. 5 (based on H.J.R. 36)

As Ballot Reads:

"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."

Pros: Participation on an appraisal review board requires both the willingness and knowledge. The ability to consolidate appraisal review boards would benefit our rural counties that have a relatively small pool of qualified persons to choose from and have difficulty finding qualified appraisal review board members. Combining appraisal review boards would be allowed, but not required and would remain a local choice.

Cons: The amendment should go further to address consolidation. Wherever consolidation of property tax systems might be beneficial to rural counties, it would be better for all operations, both appraisal and review, reducing appraisal review board recruitment requirements and appraisal district staff requirements.

Amendment No. 6 (based on H.J.R. 116)

As Ballot Reads:

"The constitutional amendment authorizing the Veterans’ Land Board to issue general obligation bonds in amounts equal to or less than amounts previously authorized."

Pros: Gives bonding authority needed by the Veterans’ Land Board to continue the Veterans’ Housing Assistance Program and Veterans’ Land Program.

Cons: The Veteran's Land Board can instead continue to go through the Legislature for the authority to issue these bonds.

Amendment No. 7 (based on H.J.R. 127)

As Ballot Reads:

"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."

Pros: Current exceptions to the dual "office-holding prohibition" allow a civil official to also hold office in most branches of the military, including the National Guard. However, the Texas State Guard and other Texas military forces were not in existence or were overlooked when these exceptions were added. This allows a civil official to become active in the Texas State Guard or other state militia and to allow state military personnel to hold another civil office.

Cons: No known opposition.

Amendment No. 8 ( based on H.J.R. 7)

As Ballot Reads:

"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."

Pros: The state currently lacks authority to contribute to a veterans hospital. This will require the Texas Veterans Commission and the Department of State Health Services to work with the VA and any other appropriate federal agency to propose that the federal government establish a veteran's hospital in the Rio Grande Valley region of the state. Currently veterans in South Texas must make about a 300 mile trip to get to the nearest VA hospital.

Cons: There is no known opposition to authorizing the state to contribute to the creation of a veterans hospital, but some have pointed out that this is using state dollars for a federal issue.

Amendment No. 9 (based on H.J.R. 102)

As Ballot Reads:

"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."

Pros: This will allow for the public's right to free and unrestricted access to state-owned beaches along the gulf coast. For 50 years, the Texas open beaches act has served as one of the strongest coastal access laws in the nation. This amendment would strengthen that law by clarifying its intent to protect the public’s right to free and unrestricted access to public beaches and by placing the law in the Constitution, thus protecting it from future tampering. Property owners who build or purchase homes on Texas beaches do so with full knowledge of the risks to their property because provisions in earnest money contracts, deeds, and title policies state that storms and rising sea levels may cause the line of vegetation to shift, thus causing the property to be located on a public beach. The open beaches act recognizes a “rolling” beachfront easement and authorizes the state to enforce the easement as natural changes occur in its location. Several recent lawsuits have challenged that law, and the proposed amendment would reduce such litigation by clarifying the law’s intent to keep public beaches public.

Cons: Some homes along the Texas Gulf Coast stood on private land until Hurricane Ike’s winds and storm surge moved the line of vegetation, leaving the homes on the public beach. This amendment would give the state too much excessive authority to restrict property owners’ rights to enjoy their property and compounding the problem for those owners by making the law more difficult to challenge in court, or change in the future.

Amendment No. 10 (based on H.J.R. 85)

As Ballot Reads:

"The constitutional amendment to provide that elected members of the governing boards of emergency services districts may serve terms not to exceed four years."

Pros: "Emergency Services Districts" are important enough to local communities to justify longer terms for district commissioners, so they can provide greater continuity and experience in district leadership. This amendment gives emergency services district commissioners time to gain such expertise. Furthermore, requiring commissioners to run for election and reelection every two years distracts from the work of the district and runs the risk of politicizing an otherwise nonpartisan office, increasing the likelihood that a candidate will be selected based on political savvy rather than qualifications for the position.

Cons: Parts of Texas that have an "Emergency Services District" have broad powers to exercise authority, including the power to levy taxes. This amendment would limit emergency services district commissioners’ accountability to the public by reducing the primary means by which voters apply influence over elected officials. Members of the Texas House of Representatives are elected every two years, and voters should expect the same amount of control in selecting the officials who serve in a strictly local capacity.

Amendment No. 11 (based on H.J.R. 14)

As Ballot Reads:

"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."

Pros: Would toughen property protections by placing clear restrictions on the use of eminent domain and by specifying that “public use” excludes the taking of property for the primary purpose of economic development or increasing tax revenues. The wording in the amendment relating to the “ownership, use, and enjoyment” of condemned property is important because it would provide strong direction to courts that rule on eminent domain cases. It requires a condemning authority to own, use, and enjoy the condemned property and would prohibit an entity from simply acquiring your property through eminent domain with no clear plans to put the property to public use. The proposed amendment shuts down a loophole that allows governmental entities to take well-maintained land by citing “blight,” claiming that the taking is necessary because surrounding areas are damaged, by allowing a government to condemn for blight only if the area being condemned is itself damaged. In addition, local governments would be unable to take large pieces of property and sell or lease them back to a private developer to build new developments with the only goal being of increasing local tax revenues.

Cons: The wording “ownership, use, and enjoyment” of condemned property is unclear and would leave it to the courts to determine the rightful scope of eminent domain in Texas. This would create uncertainty about the proper uses of eminent domain and could prevent local governments from entering into leases and other arrangements with third-party vendors to provide additional services at public facilities on property obtained through eminent domain—for example, airport hangars, hotels, restaurants, and parking facilities—that would serve the public and boost the local tax base. The language should have been amended to read “ownership, use, or enjoyment,” thus providing flexibility for justifying the taking of property.