November 4, 2025 Ballot: Constitutional Amendments

 NOVEMBER 4, 2025 BALLOT: CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS 
Proposition 1: Establishing higher education funding in restricted Supporters Say: Exempting animal feed held by retailers from property tax
use funds would lower retailer costs, prevent seasonal tax spikes, and make feed more
SJR 59, 89th Regular Session affordable for Texas farmers and ranchers.
Summary: Establishes the Permanent Technical Institution Fund and the Opponents Say: It would give feed sellers an unfair tax break since most
Available Workforce Education Fund as special funds in the state treasury to other inventory is still subject to property tax.
support the Texas Technical College System.
Proposition 6: Prohibiting business taxes on certain securities
Supporters Say: The amendment would provide essential funding for Texas
transactions
State Technical College to expand programs and facilities, address local
workforce shortages, improve access to technical education, and strengthen HJR 4, 89th Regular Session
the state’s economy, especially since TSTC lacks other major funding sources
Summary: Prohibits the enactment of laws that impose occupation or
and has struggled to fully develop new campuses.
transaction taxes on SEC- or CFTC-regulated securities market operators,
Opponents Say: It would unnecessarily increase government spending and
such as stock exchanges and brokers, while preserving existing state tax
create permanent funding outside the regular budget process, limiting future
authority, to support potential establishment of national stock exchanges in
legislatures’ control over funding levels.
Texas.
Proposition 2: Prohibiting capital gains taxes Supporters Say: Banning a financial transaction tax would protect Texas’
business-friendly climate, encourage investment, and safeguard retirement
SJR 18, 89th Regular Session
savings. They argue such taxes raise costs, reduce market efficiency, and hurt
Summary: Bans taxes on realized or unrealized capital gains for individuals,
economic growth, while Texas has funded services without imposing them.
families, estates, or trusts, while allowing property taxes and sales/use taxes.
Opponents Say: It limits future legislatures’ ability to make tax policy,
Supporters Say: It would protect Texas’ pro-business environment by
removes a potential revenue source during downturns, keeps reliance on
explicitly banning capital gains taxes, preventing policies that could
property taxes that burden working-class Texans, primarily benefits the
discourage investment, slow growth, cause capital flight, and expand
wealthy, worsens the state’s regressive tax system, and signals that working
government funding.
families are not the priority.
Opponents Say: It would unnecessarily limit future legislatures’ flexibility,
remove a potential revenue source, and risk reducing tax collections,
Proposition 7: Establishing property tax exemption for widows or
potentially allowing some businesses to avoid paying franchise taxes.
widowers of a veteran
Proposition 3: Denying bail for certain felonies HJR 133, 89th Regular Session
SJR 5, 89th Regular Session Summary: Establishes a property tax homestead exemption on all or part of
Summary: Denies bail for certain violent or sexual offenses punishable as a the market value of the homestead of a surviving spouse of a veteran who
felony. died from a service-connected condition or disease.
Supporters Say: It would allow judges to deny bail in the most serious felony Supporters Say: It ensures all surviving spouses of veterans who died
cases—such as murder, aggravated sexual assault, and human trafficking—by from service-related conditions receive the same property tax exemption,
requiring prosecutors to meet strict evidentiary standards to show that release correcting exclusions caused by the PACT Act. They add it honors veterans’
would endanger public safety or risk flight, aligning with federal practices, service, applies to a narrow group, and would have minimal fiscal impact.
protecting defendants’ rights to counsel and appeal, and addressing cases
Opponents Say: Expanding the exemption to spouses of deceased veterans
where dangerous offenders on bond have committed new crimes.
could shift a greater tax burden onto other taxpayers, especially in areas with
Opponents Say: It would expand pretrial detention for people not yet
large veteran populations.
convicted, burden defendants, and weaken the presumption of innocence
without ensuring greater public safety. They argue it could worsen racial Proposition 8: Prohibiting estate taxes
disparities, overcrowd jails, raise costs, delay trials, and allow old nonviolent
offenses to be used against defendants, while judges already have tools to HJR 2, 89th Regular Session
restrict release. Summary: Prohibits the enactment of laws that impose taxes on a decedent’s
property or transfer of estate, inheritance, legacy, succession, or gift.
Proposition 4: Reallocating sales tax revenue towards the State
Supporters Say: Banning an estate tax would ensure heirs keep inherited
Water Fund
property, prevent burdensome tax avoidance measures, and stop the
HJR 7, 89th Regular Session government from taxing the same assets multiple times.
Summary: Requires the Comptroller, for 20 years, to deposit $1 billion Opponents Say: Prohibiting an estate tax that does not exist is unnecessary,
annually from state sales and use tax revenue into the Texas Water Fund when could limit future legislatures’ options, and should not be addressed through
collections exceed $46.5 billion, with restrictions on use, a separate account a constitutional amendment, as amendments should be reserved for the
requirement, legislative appropriation for spending, and fixed allocation most critical issues affecting the state.
rules for the first 10 years (changeable only during a disaster).
Supporters Say: It would create a sustainable, dedicated funding Proposition 9: Establishing tax exemption for property used for
source to address Texas’ growing water infrastructure needs, protect income production
water security, and support population and economic growth. They
HJR 1, 89th Regular Session
argue investing now would prevent shortages, attract business, create
jobs, and ensure long-term stability amid rising costs and uncertain Summary: Establishes a tax exemption of $125,000 of the market value of
federal funding. personal tangible property used for income production.
Opponents Say: It would not provide enough funding to meet the state’s Supporters Say: Raising the business personal property tax exemption
long-term water needs or clearly prioritize new water supply development. would provide relief for small businesses, encourage growth and investment
in Texas, reduce administrative burdens, and have only a minor impact on tax
Proposition 5: Establishing tax exemptions for animal feed
revenue, with economic benefits outweighing losses.
HJR 99, 89th Regular Session Opponents Say: Increasing the exemption would shrink local tax rolls,
Summary: Establishes a property tax exemption on animal feed held by the potentially forcing higher rates that shift the burden to homeowners, and
owner of the property for retail sale. reduce state revenue by requiring the state to cover school district losses.
 ELECTION DAY – NOVEMBER 4 
Polls are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Election Day. Early voting begins on Monday, October 20, 2025, and ends Friday, October 31, 2025.
For more information on voting and the proposed amendments, please visit the Texas Secretary of State’s website at www.votetexas.gov.
For more information, condensed analyses, and additional comments in Support or Opposition of the proposed Constitutional Amendments, visit TLC.TEXAS.GOV

Proposition 10: Providing a temporary tax exemption for attract top talent, create jobs, and improve quality of life. Texas has high rates
improvements made to a house destroyed by a fire of Alzheimer’s and limited neurological care, and the institute could bring
SJR 84, 89th Regular Session economic and health benefits similar to the state’s cancer research institute,
Summary: Provides a temporary homestead exemption for improvements using funding from the current budget surplus.
made to residences destroyed by fire. Opponents Say: It creates an open-ended financial risk outside the proper
Supporters Say: It would let property appraisals be adjusted after a scope of government, with other priorities more deserving of public funds.
home is destroyed by fire, providing immediate financial relief to affected Private industry and universities can address dementia research without state
homeowners. involvement, and a new bureaucracy modeled after CPRIT could face even
Opponents Say: No opposition. greater accountability, efficiency, and favoritism problems.
Proposition 11: Increasing property tax exemption for elderly
Proposition 15: Affirming a parent’s right to make decisions for
and disabled property owners
their child
SJR 85, 89th Regular Session
SJR 34, 89th Regular Session
Summary: Increases the property tax exemption from $10,000 to $60,000 of
the market value for homesteads owned by elderly or disabled individuals. Summary: Provides that parents have the right “to exercise care, custody,
Supporters Say: Raising the residence homestead exemption for elderly and control of their child, including the right to make decisions concerning
and disabled Texans would improve housing affordability, help them remain the child’s upbringing.”
in their homes, and provide clear, visible tax relief without reducing school Supporters Say: Adding parental rights to the Texas Constitution would give
district funding. parents a clear, permanent legal foundation, make them easier to defend in
Opponents Say: The tax cut is unnecessary given recent reductions, could court, and provide clarity to avoid costly litigation, without changing existing
reduce funds for public services, and relies on a surplus that may not last. They
rights.
note it excludes renters, is not a precise way to target low-income individuals,
and creates a recurring state obligation that could strain future budgets. Opponents Say: It fails to address children’s rights and could allow the
government to condition parental rights on whether it deems parental
Proposition 12: Changing the composition of the State Commission responsibilities have been fulfilled.
on Judicial Conduct
Proposition 16: Clarifying that a voter must be a US citizen
SJR 27, 89th Regular Session
Summary: Changes the composition of the State Commission on Judicial SJR 37, 89th Regular Session
Conduct, providing for a temporary tribunal review of the Commission’s Summary: Clarifies that “persons who are not citizens of the United States”
recommendations, and changing the authority governing judicial misconduct.
cannot vote.
Supporters Say: It would reform the State Commission on Judicial Conduct
Supporters Say: Adding a citizenship requirement to the Texas Constitution
to improve transparency, accountability, and fairness by adding public
would safeguard voting rights, improve voter confidence, and provide clear
representation, limiting private sanctions, and enabling swifter, more effective
action against judicial misconduct. enforcement guidance. It would align with existing law, protect against
Opponents Say: Giving the governor more SCJC appointments than trends allowing noncitizen voting elsewhere, and uphold the right to vote as
the Texas Supreme Court could increase politicization, and that most a fundamental liberty.
commissioners should be judges to ensure proper evaluation of judicial Opponents Say: It is unnecessary since laws already limit voting to U.S.
conduct. citizens and noncitizen voting is rare. It could cause confusion or discourage
participation among eligible voters, contribute to anti-immigrant rhetoric,
Proposition 13: Increasing the homestead property tax exemption
and set a precedent for using constitutional amendments for symbolic
SJR 2, 89th Regular Session
purposes rather than essential needs.
Summary: Increases the property tax exemption from $100,000 to $140,000
of the market value of a homestead. Proposition 17: Providing a property tax exemption for the
Supporters Say: Raising the school district homestead exemption would construction of border infrastructure
give homeowners significant, broad-based tax relief, help offset inflation and
HJR 34, 89th Regular Session
rising local rates, and support elderly Texans on fixed incomes. They add it
could boost the housing market, aid first-time buyers, and lower rents, while Summary: Authorizes the state legislature to provide a property tax
the state would replace any lost school district revenue. exemption for the construction of border infrastructure on property located
Opponents Say: It would cut revenue for public services, exclude renters in a county that borders Mexico.
and commercial property owners, and risk shifting the tax burden. The state
Supporters Say: It would prevent higher property taxes for landowners
should invest surplus funds in services, future school funding could be at risk,
who host border security infrastructure, encouraging voluntary participation
and lasting relief requires limits on local spending and tax hikes.
without financial penalty. The exemption would apply only to the added value
Proposition 14: Establishing the Dementia Prevention and from the infrastructure in border counties and would not affect the property’s
Research Institute of Texas existing appraised value.
SJR 3, 89th Regular Session Opponents Say: The state should not use tax exemptions to encourage
Summary: Establishes the Dementia Prevention and Research Institute of more border security infrastructure on private land. The exemption would
Texas with $3 billion from the state general fund. narrow the tax base, potentially shift the burden to other property owners,
Supporters Say: Creating the Dementia Prevention and Research Institute of and could force local governments to raise tax rates, making broad-based tax
Texas would invest in urgent research on preventing and treating dementia, relief a better approach.
Senator Nathan Johnson
District 16
Room 4E.2 · P.O. Box 12068 · Austin, Texas 78711
(512) 463-0116 • District16.Johnson@senate.texas.gov
District Office: 12222 Merit Drive · Suite 1010 · Dallas, Texas 75251
(972) 701-0349
jOhnsOn.senate.texas.gOv