Constitutional amendments to appear on November ballot

County residents have followed the ongoing discussions about construction of a new Lampasas County Jail, and they will have an opportunity to ratify or defeat bond funding for the project when the Nov. 6 election rolls around.

Voters may not know much, however, about the 16 state constitutional amendments that also will appear on the ballot next month.

What follows is a summary of propositions 1-8, with arguments for and against each amendment, so voters can make an informed choice at the polling booth. (Summaries of the remaining proposals will appear in Friday's edition.) The office of Rep. Jimmie Don Aycock supplied research information for this analysis.

*

Proposition 1: "The constitutional amendment providing for the continuation of the constitutional appropriation for facilities and other capital items at Angelo State University on a change in the governance of the university." This measure would move Angelo State University from under the Texas State University System to the Texas Tech University system. The legislature transferred governance of ASU to Texas Tech and its board of regents, effective Sept. 1, 2007.

Supporters say the proposition is the last step in implementing the wishes of ASU students, the residents and business community of San Angelo to realign the university under Texas Tech. This transfer will expand educational opportunities and offer more collaboration with a top-tier university that shares ASU's regional and philosophical interests. Affiliating ASU with Texas Tech will not mean higher tuition rates.

Opponents say ASU students have benefitted from being part of the Texas State University System. The Texas Tech system's cost per full-time student is about three times higher than Texas State's, which could mean sharply increased tuition for ASU.

Proposition 2: "The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of $500 million in general obligation bonds to finance educational loans to students and authorizing bond enhancement agreements with respect to general obligation bonds issued for that purpose." The amendment would allow the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to issue bonds to finance loans to college students, in addition to those already authorized by the Constitution.

Supporters say Prop. 2 is needed to meet the growing demand for student financial assistance. The program has a demonstrated record of success and is self-supporting, depending not on tax dollars but on money from loan repayments, fed- eral subsidies and other sources.

Opponents say Texas should not add to its debt by issuing additional bonds. If an economic downturn caused a high rate of default on the student loans, cost to the state could be considerable. Also, the program competes with private lenders who are at a disadvantage because they must make a profit to stay in business, which is not true of the government.

Proposition 3: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide that the maximum appraisal value of a residence homestead for ad valorem taxation is limited to the lesser of the most recent market value of the residence homestead as determined by the appraisal entity or 110 percent, or a greater percentage of the appraised value of the residence homestead for the preceding tax year."

The Texas Constitution already allows the legislature to limit the average annual increase in the taxable appraised value of a homestead to 10 percent. Most appraisal districts determine the taxable value of property on an annual basis, but some appraise every three years -- which means taxable value could increase as high as 30 percent. This proposition would limit the increase, regardless of the interval between appraisals.

Supporters say Prop. 3 would align the law so it works as originally intended, with an annual 10 percent cap on the increase in taxable value of their home. And since most appraisal districts already value property in either one- or two-year cycles, this change would have little impact on local revenue.

Opponents say the measure is unnecessary, as most larger ap- praisal districts already determine taxable values on an annual basis. Smaller districts could be compelled to appraise property annually, which would result in greater expenses. And such a tax cap for residence homesteads would merely shift the burden to commercial property owners, who are not subject to the cap. Others say a cap of 10 percent is too high to protect homeowners from large increases in their property tax bills and should be lowered to 3 percent.

Proposition 4: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the issuance of up to $1 billion in bonds payable from the general revenues of the state for maintenance, improvement, repair, and construction projects and for the purchase of needed equipment." Bonds would be used for state agencies such as the Texas Youth Commission, Texas Department of Criminal Justice and Department of Public Safety.

Supporters say crucial long-term construction and repair projects otherwise would not be funded. The largest portion of the bonding authority is reserved for prison construction, which is sorely needed. Prop. 4 also would provide funding for essential repairs at state parks. Texas cannot afford to neglect these and other facilities. Opponents say voters would have no say over how these bond proceeds are allocated. Bonds should not be issued to finance repair and maintenance projects, which agencies can budget for in advance. Unlike construction projects, repairs have too short a life to justify incurring long-term debt to finance them.

Proposition 5: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit the voters of a municipality having a population of less than 10,000 to authorize the governing body of the municipality to enter into an agreement with an owner of real property in or adjacent to an area in the municipality that has been approved for funding under certain programs administered by the Texas Department of Agriculture under which the parties agree that all ad valorem taxes imposed on the owner's property may not be increased for the first five tax years after the tax year in which the agreement is entered into."

Cities with fewer than 10,000 residents could hold an election permitting them to enter into agreements with property owners in redevelopment programs to freeze their taxes for five years. This authority would apply only to cities that receive funding through the TDA's Downtown Revitalization Program or the Main Street Improvement Program. The freeze would apply only to property taxes imposed by the local entity.

Supporters say the measure creates an incentive for property owners to improve downtown buildings. The temporary tax freeze would apply only to smaller cities that are unable to use economic development incentives available to larger cities. The city would benefit from preservation of historic structures and enhanced economic development, and the property owner would benefit from a tax freeze that could justify the renovation costs.

Opponents say the proposal would grant certain property owners a double benefit -- infrastructure improvements funded by state tax dollars through TDA's revitalization programs, and a five-year property tax freeze. Any tax break shifts the burden to other taxpayers, and the effect is more pronounced in smaller communities. Those who benefit from improvements in their property should have to pay their share of taxes on that enhanced value. Owners of commercial buildings would be eligible for a tax freeze that is not available to homeowners when they carry out improvements on property.

Proposition 6: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to exempt from ad valorem taxation one motor vehicle owned by an individual and used in the course of the owner's occupation or profession and also for personal activities of the owner."

Supporters say many Texans use their personal vehicles to help run their businesses. Exempting these vehicles from local property taxation will provide a small amount of tax relief to entrepreneurs such as realtors, farmers, salespersons and other small-business owners. The exemption would be limited to one vehicle per person.

Opponents say vehicles should be taxable and treated as any other personal property that generates income. Others say the limitation that only one vehicle could be exempt is too strict. Many individuals have two or three vehicles they use for both personal and professional purposes.

Proposition 7: "The constitutional amendment to allow governmental entities to sell property acquired through eminent domain back to the previous owners at the price the entities paid to acquire the property."

Supporters say this measure would help ensure the fair treatment of landowners whose property was taken through eminent domain but then not used. They should be able to repurchase property at the price they were paid for it rather than at appreciated market value.

Opponents say property owners have been fairly compensated when their property was taken through eminent domain and should not be allowed to repurchase property at less than fair market value.

Proposition 8: "The constitutional amendment to clarify certain provisions relating to the making of a home equity loan and use of home equity loan proceeds." This proposal would:

• specify that the 12-day waiting period for loan closing could begin on the date an oral loan application was submitted.

• require that any designation of homestead property for agricultural use be determined at the time of closing.

• prohibit the use of a preprinted check unsolicited by the borrower to obtain an advance under a home equity line of credit.

• require that blanks relating to substantive terms of the agreement be completed by the borrower before receiving the loan.

• require that the borrower receive a copy of the final loan application and all associated documents at least one business day before the closing.

• allow the borrower to secure a second home equity loan within one year on a homestead in a declared disaster area.

Supporters say Prop. 8 would make several important clarifications to lending practices while increasing consumer protection.

Opponents say some of these protections are excessive and would place an undue burden on lendors. Also, the Texas Constitution should not be used to regulate the ways in which home equity loans can be used.

Early voting: Office of County Elections Administrator 412 S. Live Oak St. Courtyard Square

Dates and hours: Oct. 22 to Nov. 2.......8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Last day to apply for ballot by mail, Oct. 30