YES or NO on November 3rd Vote for Texas Residential Homeowners Amendment? (Dallas: real estate, 2009)

[UTDGraduate]

I am going to vote Yes on these propostions. How about you people?

Proposition 2
(HJR 36 - #1)

HJR 36 would amend the constitution to authorize the legislature to provide for the taxation of a residence homestead solely on the basis of the property's value as a residence homestead, regardless of whether the property may have a higher value if it were used for other purposes.
The proposed amendment would appear on the ballot as follows: "The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for the ad valorem taxation of a residence homestead solely on the basis of the property’s value as a residence homestead."
Proposition 3
(HJR 36 - #3)

HJR 36 would amend the constitution to require the legislature to provide for the administration and enforcement of uniform standards and procedures for appraisal of property for ad valorem tax purposes.
The proposed amendment would appear on the ballot as follows: "The constitutional amendment providing for uniform standards and procedures for the appraisal of property for ad valorem tax purposes."

Go to this web link for more info: Explanatory Statements for the November 3rd, 2009 Constitutional Amendment Election

[lakehighlands]

Proposition 2-
The value of any property anywhere in the state of Texas should be based on its Highest and Best Use. Highest and Best Use is the most probable use of the land or improved property that is physically possible, legally possible, financially feasible, and the use that provides maximum profitability. Limiting the amount a residential homestead can be valued at effectively eliminates the appraisal district's responsibility to put an "accurate" value on the property for ad valorem tax purposes.

An example: A residential property sits on a very busy, commercialized street. Surrounding commercial properties have sold in excess of $15 per square foot. If the residential property were to be placed on the market, it would sell for land value of $15 per square foot, but because of Proposition 2, it has to be valued as a residential homestead. Why should the owner of this residential property be assessed at a lower property value than any of the other properties?

Proposition 3-

The legislature has no business enforcing appraisal standards, that should be left to the counties. We do not pay "state taxes" on our properties, so why should the state legislature be involved in the decision making processes for ad valorem tax purposes. Additionally, most of the larger appraisal districts have no issue abiding by and following USPAP standards.

[momof2dfw]

Originally Posted by lakehighlands

Proposition 2-
The value of any property anywhere in the state of Texas should be based on its Highest and Best Use. Highest and Best Use is the most probable use of the land or improved property that is physically possible, legally possible, financially feasible, and the use that provides maximum profitability. Limiting the amount a residential homestead can be valued at effectively eliminates the appraisal district's responsibility to put an "accurate" value on the property for ad valorem tax purposes.

An example: A residential property sits on a very busy, commercialized street. Surrounding commercial properties have sold in excess of $15 per square foot. If the residential property were to be placed on the market, it would sell for land value of $15 per square foot, but because of Proposition 2, it has to be valued as a residential homestead. Why should the owner of this residential property be assessed at a lower property value than any of the other properties?

Proposition 3-

The legislature has no business enforcing appraisal standards, that should be left to the counties. We do not pay "state taxes" on our properties, so why should the state legislature be involved in the decision making processes for ad valorem tax purposes. Additionally, most of the larger appraisal districts have no issue abiding by and following USPAP standards.

I don't think renters should be allowed to vote in instances like this. I'm with you though on the props. We keep this nonsense up we are going to turn into California II.

[UTDGraduate]

Originally Posted by lakehighlands

Proposition 2-
The value of any property anywhere in the state of Texas should be based on its Highest and Best Use. Highest and Best Use is the most probable use of the land or improved property that is physically possible, legally possible, financially feasible, and the use that provides maximum profitability. Limiting the amount a residential homestead can be valued at effectively eliminates the appraisal district's responsibility to put an "accurate" value on the property for ad valorem tax purposes.

An example: A residential property sits on a very busy, commercialized street. Surrounding commercial properties have sold in excess of $15 per square foot. If the residential property were to be placed on the market, it would sell for land value of $15 per square foot, but because of Proposition 2, it has to be valued as a residential homestead. Why should the owner of this residential property be assessed at a lower property value than any of the other properties?

Proposition 3-

The legislature has no business enforcing appraisal standards, that should be left to the counties. We do not pay "state taxes" on our properties, so why should the state legislature be involved in the decision making processes for ad valorem tax purposes. Additionally, most of the larger appraisal districts have no issue abiding by and following USPAP standards.

* Proposition 2 will require county appraisal districts to value a home as a home. Currently, appraisal districts can use the "best and highest use" method to value a residence based on its potential use. For example, a residence in a neighborhood zoned for mixed use could be appraised at a higher amount for its possible use as a commercial property. The residents living in these areas are being suffered with paying higher property tax.

* Proposition 3 gives the state the ability to make sure appraisal methods are fair and consistent throughout the 254 Texas counties.


There is a trade-off on these props. The advantage is for those long-term residents that will be no longer suffered to pay higher for their property tax. The disadvantage is for those doing real estate/home investment.

[lakehighlands]

A property should be valued for ad valorem tax purposes at what it would sell for in an open market scenario, with both willing and able buyer and seller. Fee Appraisers that would look at the scenario of a mixed used neighborhood would value the property at its highest and best use, not at the value of the property as a residential homestead. Ad valorem valuation should be no different.

[superdietz]

I'm voting NO. Texas currently does not have a state tax on your property. Only county, school and city. This would basically be adding a state tax. No thank you.

[UTDGraduate]

Originally Posted by superdietz

I'm voting NO. Texas currently does not have a state tax on your property. Only county, school and city. This would basically be adding a state tax. No thank you.

What do you mean "state tax"?
I think most people will vote YES, including me.

Check out this web link for more info:
Editorial: We recommend on state props, DISD | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Opinion: Editorials

[lakehighlands]

Do you own a home UTDGraduate? If so, do you think it should be appraised at the amount you could sell it for?

[MurphyPl1]

I'm actually torn on Prop 2. We have a situation in Murphy that is exactly what this Prop deals with. Quite elderly lady living on a few acres across from the new Murphy Marketplace. Longest Murphy resident in town. Living on a fixed income. Intends to live in the home til she dies or has to live in a nursing home. It IS her residence and has been valued as such until this past year.

The Murphy City Council in their 2008 Comprehensive Plan included a Future Land Use plan that would make that property commercial. THAT is what the County used to determine the value this last year. So now the property is suddenly valued substantially more than it historically has been. Because 7 people on the current City Council believe that the land should be used for commercial property. (keep in mind she's sided on either side by parkland and residential homes.)

So I can get behind the why penalize someone because someone else determined their property would be good for a higher and best use? But I can also get behind the fact that she could theoretically sell it for substantially more as commercial than if it was zoned residential so why not be taxed at that level. Which is why I do like the addition of the "homestead" portion of the law.

I normally like to vote early but I'm still working my way thru these amendments.

[yjc281]

Originally Posted by MurphyPl1

I'm actually torn on Prop 2.

I have to think through this but if the only disadvantage for those is what UTDGraduate mentioned:
"The disadvantage is for those doing real estate/home investment."
Then I will have to vote YES on both.
Homes are not investments or your ATMs!
They are fixed assets that are not supposed to increase or decrease in values dramatically in a short timeframe.
Any other disadvantages?