Jail construction proposal fails
$20 million in certificates of obligation
1,139 against 593 for
By DAVID LOWE Staff Writer

Lampasas County voters rejected by nearly a two-to-one margin a proposition for a new county jail and expansion of the Lampasas County Office Building.

The proposal, which would have authorized the issuance of a maximum of $20 million in certificates of obligation, failed on Tuesday by 1,139 votes to 593, or 66 percent to 34 percent.

Christine Groves, who helped organize opposition to the issuance of certificates of obligation, said county voters were most upset about the price of the proposed jail site, which the county purchased for about $500,000. Some opponents of the jail proposition argued the land sold for less than $160,000 just a year before the county bought it.

"I think that's what most people were upset about more than anything," Mrs. Groves said.

Mrs. Groves said the Lampasas County Commissioners Court should approve a new jail at the property it already has purchased behind the county office building.

"I'd still like to see it put right here by the courthouse," she said. "I know the city is objecting, but that's why (the commissioners) bought it."

County Judge Wayne Boultinghouse issued the following statement Wednesday at noon:

"We here at the Lampasas County Courthouse are, of course, disappointed that the jail bond issue did not pass. This item will be discussed in Commissioners Court again in the near future.

"Several things were not considered when votes were cast against the bond proposal:

1. It is counterproductive to Lampasas County taxpayers to keep sending over dollars to other counties to fund their jails, instead of paying for our own facility.

2. Taxes will have to increase to house prisoners elsewhere. One example is the rapid, recent increase in fuel costs.

3. Based on the estimated increase in construction costs of 3/4 to 1 percent per month, the expense to build a jail will be more the longer we wait. As has been stated before, our jail population continues to increase and that equates into increased costs of transporting and housing inmates elsewhere."

Tuesday's election also included 16 proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution. Statewide results on the constitutional amendments follow.

• Proposition 1, appropriation for facilities and change of governance at Angelo State University -- 66 percent for; 34 percent against.

• Proposition 2, issuance of $500 million in bonds for student loans -- 66 percent for; 34 percent against.

• Proposition 3, limiting the appraised value of residence homesteads -- 71 percent for; 29 percent against.

• Proposition 4, issuance of as much as $1 billion in bonds for construction projects -- 58 percent for; 42 percent against.

• Proposition 5, allowing municipalities with a population less than 10,000 to hold local elections to limit property taxes in areas approved for Texas Department of Agriculture funding -- 66 percent for; 34 percent against.

• Proposition 6, allowing individuals to exempt from ad valorem taxation one personal motor vehicle -- 74 percent for; 26 percent against.

• Proposition 7, allowing government entities to sell property acquired through eminent domain back to the original owner at the price the entity paid to obtain the property -- 80 percent for; 20 percent against.

• Proposition 8, clarifying provisions relating to home equity loans -- 78 percent for; 22 percent against.

• Proposition 9, granting ad valorem tax exemptions to certain totally disabled veterans -- 91 percent for; 9 percent against.

• Proposition 10, abolishing the office of inspector of hides and animals -- 77 percent for; 23 percent against.

• Proposition 11, requiring a record vote, with public access via the Internet, on votes of the Texas Legislature -- 85 percent for; 15 percent against.

• Proposition 12, issuance of a maximum of $5 billion in bonds for highway improvement projects -- 63 percent for; 37 percent against.

• Proposition 13, denying bail to a person who violates certain court orders or conditions of release in felony or family violence cases -- 84 percent for; 16 percent against.

• Proposition 14, permitting a justice or judge who reaches the mandatory retirement age while in office to serve the remainder of the current term -- 75 percent for; 25 percent against.

• Proposition 15, creation of the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas and issuing a maximum of $3 billion in bonds for cancer research -- 61 percent for; 29 percent against.

• Proposition 16, issuance of a maximum of $250 million in bonds by the Texas Water Development Board to provide assistance to economically distressed areas -- 61 percent for; 39 percent against.

The Lampasas County vote on several constitutional amendments differed markedly from state results.

Local voters rejected Proposition 4 by a total of 62 percent to 38 percent and opposed Proposition 12 by a tally of 59 percent to 41 percent.

Proposition 15 failed in Lampasas County 57 percent to 43 percent, and 56 percent of county voters who cast a ballot on Proposition 16 rejected the proposed amendment.

In addition, Lampasas County voters approved Propositions 2 and 5 by much narrower margins than the overall state total reflected. Proposition 2 passed in Lampasas County by a vote of 885 to 811, and Proposition 5 passed 871 to 808 votes. Both county totals equated to a difference of four percentage points. Statewide, Proposition 2 passed by 31 percentage points, and Proposition 5 passed by nearly a two-to-one ratio.

Of 11,814 registered voters in Lampasas County, 1,767 -- or 15 percent -- participated in the election.

With the exception of Proposition 9, on which 13 percent of Texas' registered voters cast a ballot, none of the other state constitutional amendments drew more than 8.6 percent turnout from voters statewide.