Amending Texas’ Constitution, understanding the ballot

Early voting begins Oct. 21 and the Navasota Examiner will publish the 10 proposed Constitutional amendments over the next few weeks. The Condensed Analyses of Proposed Constitutional Amendments, 86th Legislative Session for the Nov. 5, 2019 Election is published by the Texas Legislative Council and available at: https://www.tlc.texas.gov/docs/amendments/analyses19_condensed.pdf.A detailed analysis is available at: https://www.tlc.texas.gov/docs/amendments/analyses19.pdf.

Summary of Comments

The following comments supporting or opposing the proposed constitutional amendment reflect positions that were presented in committee proceedings, during house or senate floor debate, or in the analysis of the resolution prepared by the House Research Organization (HRO) when the resolution was considered by the House of Representatives.

Proposition 1 (H.J.R. 72)

The constitutional amendment permitting a person to hold more than one office as a municipal judge at the same time.

Summary Analysis

The constitutional amendment proposed by H.J.R. 72 would amend the Texas Constitution to authorize a person to hold more than one office as an elected or appointed municipal judge in more than one municipality at the same time.

Comments by Supporters

• A number of smaller municipalities lack individuals willing or qualified to serve as a municipal judge, which impedes the ability of these municipalities to deal with cases such as ordinance violations and fine-only misdemeanors. Although current law allows appointed municipal judges to serve more than one municipality, this authority does not extend to elected judges. Allowing a person to hold elected office as a municipal judge in more than one municipality would make it easier to fill that office in smaller municipalities. This would help improve public safety and produce a fairer and more efficient judicial system.

Comments by Opponents

• Allowing a person to hold elected office as a municipal judge in multiple municipalities could lead to judges not being able to dedicate an adequate amount of time or attention to local concerns in a given municipality.

Proposition 2 (S.J.R. 79)

The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of additional general obligation bonds by the Texas Water Development Board in an amount not to exceed $200 million to provide financial assistance for the development of certain projects in economically distressed areas.

Summary Analysis

The constitutional amendment proposed by S.J.R. 79 would add Section 49-d-14 to Article III, Texas Constitution, to allow the Texas Water Development Board to issue additional general obligation bonds for the economically distressed areas program account. The board would be authorized to issue the bonds in amounts such that the aggregate principal amount of the bonds outstanding at any time issued under the added section would not exceed $200 million. The bonds would be used to provide financial assistance for the development of water supply and sewer service projects in economically distressed areas of the state.

Comments by

Supporters

• The EDAP administered by the Texas Water Development Board is an essential program that needs additional funding. Without this additional funding, the ability of the board to continue funding existing projects and support future projects for communities that could not otherwise afford secure access to safe water will be jeopardized.

• The high costs associated with maintaining and expanding water infrastructure in Texas are best financed through the issuance of bonds as this will allow for greater and more reliable long-term funding. Funding the EDAP through general revenue appropriations would strain existing revenue sources and force lawmakers to choose between meeting the state’s water infrastructure needs and providing other important public services.

• In certain areas of the state, a lack of adequate sewer services has led to raw sewage runoff, overflowing septic systems, and public health problems. The EDAP is a key tool for the state to attempt to address these issues and ensure that all Texans have basic water and sewer services.

• A reliable, sustained funding source for the EDAP incentivizes economic development, investment, and job growth.

Comments by Opponents

• The state should not constitutionally dedicate funds to specific programs. Any necessary infrastructure improvements should be funded using general revenue.