Nov 2, 2021 Texas Voting

[4wheels]

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2021/10/22/texas-voters-will-decide-eight-state-constitutional-amendments-on-nov-2-how-would-they-impact-you/

Vote and vote often

[Ætheling]

Some good propositions up on this one. Regaining freedom.

[WItoTX]

Thanks for posting. I voted yesterday, and was the ONLY voter in the building at lunch time. Kinda scary...

Right now is the time democrats get their spending through. Every conservative/libertarian NEEDS to go vote.

Democrats, you can vote next year, maybe.

[locolobo]

I have a question about Prop 1. Why would the PRCA and WPRA not be able to hold charitable fundraising during their events under current Texas law?
Seems like every organization in the state of Texas and their dogs hold charitable fundraising for some group or another.
Just seeking justification for this proposed law.

[Mike D]

What is everyone’s take on Prop 2? Is that just another Avenue to increase property taxes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[tvc184]

What is everyone’s take on Prop 2? Is that just another Avenue to increase property taxes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

It potentially could. Texas cities already have the authority to issue bonds for a road improvements in certain areas. That authority was not granted or not explicitly granted toward counties. It would basically make the county government equal to a city government.

If the county increases the ad valorem taxes, they cannot use more than 65% of the increase to go toward repaying the bonds. So …. I think the taxes are allowed to increase up to 10% a year. That would mean up to 65% “of the increase” could go to repay bonds. Now they could still raise taxes the same 10% maximum and use it for whatever they want to even if this does not pass. They could still use the increase in taxes to pay for road improvements but if I understand right, the difference is they can’t issue bonds which are basically a low interest loan.

So if a county had to raise their taxes next year by 4% just to pay for expenses, if they had to pay back the municipal bond with interest, they would raise your taxes another couple of percent to cover it.

But they cannot increase taxes more than state law allows annually. It just gives the county an authority to issue bonds. That leaves the potential for increasing taxes more than they would otherwise need for operating expenses as long as it does not go over the 10% state cap.

If that makes sense.

[Leemo]

Voting......
Does your vote really count?
Is it rigged?

[Mike D]

Voting......
Does your vote really count?
Is it rigged?

Well it dang sure doesn’t count if you don’t vote.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Mike D]

It potentially could. Texas cities already have the authority to issue bonds for a road improvements in certain areas. That authority was not granted or not explicitly granted toward counties. It would basically make the county government equal to a city government.

If the county increases the ad valorem taxes, they cannot use more than 65% of the increase to go toward repaying the bonds. So …. I think the taxes are allowed to increase up to 10% a year. That would mean up to 65% “of the increase” could go to repay bonds. Now they could still raise taxes the same 10% maximum and use it for whatever they want to even if this does not pass. They could still use the increase in taxes to pay for road improvements but if I understand right, the difference is they can’t issue bonds which are basically a low interest loan.

So if a county had to raise their taxes next year by 4% just to pay for expenses, if they had to pay back the municipal bond with interest, they would raise your taxes another couple of percent to cover it.

But they cannot increase taxes more than state law allows annually. It just gives the county an authority to issue bonds. That leaves the potential for increasing taxes more than they would otherwise need for operating expenses as long as it does not go over the 10% state cap.

If that makes sense.

It does, thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[meltingfeather]

What is everyone’s take on Prop 2? Is that just another Avenue to increase property taxes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Yes.
Where and how much is the question. Give a government money and they will find a way to spend 200% of it.
It will pass. Texans love to vote for Constitutional amendments.

[meltingfeather]

I have a question about Prop 1. Why would the PRCA and WPRA not be able to hold charitable fundraising during their events under current Texas law?
Seems like every organization in the state of Texas and their dogs hold charitable fundraising for some group or another.
Just seeking justification for this proposed law.

The Constitution specifically allows only certain types of professional sports team charitable organizations to hold raffles and currently only at “games.” The amendment changes those definitions to include the PRCA & WPRA in the organizations and “rodeo events” in addition to “games.”

[sp-bow]

Voted this afternoon.

[marshman]

Where could one find out more info on all the amendments?

[tvc184]

Where could one find out more info on all the amendments?

Google “ Texas constitutional amendment election” and you will get many responses and in some cases the actual bill number that put the amendment on the ballot.

On this was from the league of women voters, there is a link on the left side of the page (in the magenta/purple box) that lists the amendments and the pros and the cons for each one.

https://www.lwvtexas.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=979482&module_id=490719

.

[tpack]

What is everyone’s take on Prop 2? Is that just another Avenue to increase property taxes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Will be voting NO on this one. With the price on property skyrocketing, tax revenue will be increasing already. They need to find a way to use the money they have already to do the improvements.