Posted in the Deer Park Forum
#1 Oct 21, 2013
Early voting started today for some State Constitutional Amendments and two County Props.
I went and voted this morning. The State Amendments are mostly benign changes to remove obsolete portions of our constitution. From my perspective their are two 'important' changes.
State Prop 6: This creates a fund to write interest free loans from the state for improvements to water infrastructure. Despite the media's insistence that the last session was about abortion, this was abi-partisan solution I think the state should be proud of. If it passes, it is intended to solve the state's water problems for the next generation.
county Prop 2: This is the more controversial one. It is a bond to fund improvements to the astrodome to turn it into a convention center. From where I sit, George R. Brown is a fine convention center that meets our needs. I don't see the point in spending taxpayer dollars to upgrade the astrodome, I think we should just tear the structure down and pocket the savings.
Where do you stand? Have you voted yet?
#2 Oct 25, 2013
Money for prop 6 would be transferred from our rainy day fund.
A question that must be answered: Who sits on the Water Development Board.
"Lending arrangements DO NOT QUALIFY for an emergency raid on the RDF. You are pulling a con on Texan taxpayers to cover your profligate overspending and we aren't going to let you get away with it again."
Constitutional amendments have already dealt with water issues once in 2001 and again in 2011.
"Prop 6 essentially claims to guarantee that at least 10% and 20%, respectively, of the endowment fund will be
used for rural Texas projects and conservation programs. If we were confident of this guarantee, we might have
entertained supporting the amendment. However, the tricky language in the Houses enabling legislation for Prop
6, and the tenor of the debate over HB 4, concerns us enough to deny our support. Some of our environmental
friends are supporting Prop 6, much to our regret. We believe they have made an honest, but grave, mistake.
The language in HB4 that
dedicates 10% of the fund to rural projects, which may include agricultural
conservation, and 20% of the fund to conservation and re-use in each five-year planning period, is ambiguous.
Ambiguity could have been avoided if the phrase
not less than such percentages had been substituted
for the phrase
shall undertake to apply
not less than. Specifically, we ask what is the purpose of saying shall
undertake to apply other than to avoid the consequence of putting the words shall and apply together?"
Nix Prop 6!
Add your comments below
|Hillary Helped Criminal Get Ten Million Dollars||3 min||Defiant1||8|
|Put lipstck on a pig...still a Republican!||12 min||Defiant1||8|
|democrats gaining strength in Texas||16 min||Defiant1||34|
|Vote Democrat....What have you got to lose?||2 hr||observer||3|
|Trump Talking Special Prosecutor if Elected||2 hr||Defiant1||19|
|Obama Offends People in Louisana||2 hr||Defiant1||24|
|zika coming to Harris County||2 hr||Defiant1||19|
Find what you want!
Search Deer Park Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC