Texas REALTORS® Positions on Nov. 4, 2025 Propositions
Legislation
Bill: SJR 59
Authors: Birdwell | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment providing for the creation of the permanent technical institution infrastructure fund and the available workforce education fund to support the capital needs of educational programs offered by the Texas State Technical College System."
Texas REALTORS® Support Because:
Prop 1 would ensure stable and long-term funding to address the growing demand for a regionally responsive skilled workforce in key sectors.
Legislation
Bill: SJR 18
Authors: Perry | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment prohibiting the imposition of a tax on the realized or unrealized capital gains of an individual, family, estate, or trust."
Texas REALTORS® Support Because:
Prop 2 would encourage economic growth and contribute to Texas’ pro-business environment by prohibiting capital gains taxes in the state. While the state Constitution currently prohibits an income tax, it does not explicitly prohibit a tax on capital gains. Capital gains taxes can discourage investment, slow economic growth, and reduce job creation. Prop 2 would also provide long-term certainty in tax policy for businesses and investors and would give them confidence that Texas is committed to low taxes and a business-friendly environment.
The resolution would eliminate all capital gains taxes, including the franchise tax on business trusts, which could be considered a capital gains tax.
Legislation
Bill: SJR 5
Authors: Huffman | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment requiring the denial of bail under certain circumstances to persons accused of certain offenses punishable as a felony."
Supporters Say:
By allowing judges to deny bail for cases involving felonies such as murder, aggravated sexual, and human trafficking, Prop 3 would prevent high-risk offenders from committing additional crimes while awaiting trial. Pretrial releases on low bail or personal recognizance can allow dangerous individuals to remain in the community, as high-risk defendants who can afford bail may be released, even if they pose a significant threat to public safety. By limiting this authority to only the most serious offenses, the resolution would ensure that only those individuals who posed the greatest risk were denied bail.
The proposed amendment also would provide a distinct threshold for denying bail by requiring the state to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that granting bail was insufficient to reasonably prevent a person’s willful nonappearance in court and otherwise ensure public safety. This standard is already used in other areas of the law, such as the termination of parental rights, providing judges with a consistent and well-established benchmark for making this determination. Additionally, this determination could only be made after a judge found probable cause that the defendant had committed the underlying offense. This discretionary approach would establish two burdens that a judge must meet to detain an individual under the resolution, which would balance public safety concerns with the constitutional rights of the accused. The resolution would give judges the tools to make informed decisions about pretrial detention, ensuring that detention was based on specific findings and grounded in a clear and convincing evidentiary standard.
The proposed amendment also includes several procedural safeguards to protect defendants' rights. Defendants would have the right to be represented by counsel at bail denial hearings, ensuring legal representation during this critical stage of the pretrial process. Additionally, if a judge determined that probable cause existed for one of the charged offenses and that the clear and convincing standard was met, the defendant would retain the right to appeal the decision. Current law also requires that prosecutors meet certain indictment timelines under the Code of Criminal Procedure to protect a defendant’s right to a speedy trial. If these deadlines were not met, a judge would have to lower a defendant’s bond amount.
Opponents Say:
Prop 3 would lead to longer pretrial detentions for individuals who have yet to be convicted of a crime, increasing the financial and personal burdens of detention on these defendants and undermining the presumption of innocence. The resolution also could be ineffective at addressing its stated goal of increasing public safety, as high pretrial incarceration rates have been shown to be associated with increased recidivism, difficulty reintegrating into the community, and poorer long-term outcomes for defendants. The resolution also could exacerbate racial disparities in the state’s criminal justice system, as people of color are already overrepresented in Texas jails.
Texas judges already have the discretion to deny bail to potentially dangerous individuals by setting cash bonds at amounts that effectively prevent release. Additionally, Texas consistently ranks among the states with the highest pretrial detention rates even as violent crime rates have decreased, suggesting that the current system already provides for substantial pretrial detention. Increasing reliance on pretrial detention could exacerbate overcrowding in county jails, which are often understaffed and struggling with limited resources. This strain on resources could ultimately limit the effectiveness of the criminal justice system, potentially leading to higher taxpayer costs without commensurate public safety benefits.
Creating a requirement for a clear and convincing evidentiary standard without establishing a specific timeline by which this determination must be made also could lead to delays in trial proceedings, causing alleged offenders to be held for longer without meaningful recourse and undermining defendants' right to a speedy trial.
Analysis provided by House Research Organization
Legislation
Bill: HJR 7
Authors: Harris | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment to dedicate a portion of the revenue derived from state sales and use taxes to the Texas water fund and to provide for the allocation and use of that revenue."
Texas REALTORS® Support Because:
By constitutionally dedicating an annual revenue stream of $1 billion to the Texas Water Fund, Prop 4 would help address the deficit in funding for Texas’ pressing water needs. In 2023, the 88th Legislature established and allocated $5 billion to the Texas Water Fund, a flexible fund administered by the Texas Water Development Board that allows the board to allocate funding to various water strategies based on differing regional needs and changing conditions. Studies have suggested that $154 billion will be needed over the next 50 years to fully address water infrastructure concerns as the state’s population and water demand continue to grow, and HJR 7 would help provide a sustainable funding mechanism to help meet these needs.
The funding model established by this amendment would be consistent with other models of infrastructure funding, like transportation, and would provide a predictable funding stream to improve water planning efforts and ensure that infrastructure could keep up with demands without increasing pressure on ratepayers. Without significant investment in water, the risk of shortages could impact quality of life for Texas residents and stall economic development, as businesses may choose to establish themselves elsewhere due to concerns about access to water in Texas. Since water costs are increasing and water projects can take a long time to complete, it is critical that this investment happen now to ensure the state’s water security into the future.
Legislation
Bill: HJR 99
Authors: Harris | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to exempt from ad valorem taxation tangible personal property consisting of animal feed held by the owner of the property for sale at retail."
Supporters Say:
Prop 5 would provide property tax relief for livestock producers throughout the state by allowing the Legislature to exempt animal feed from property tax. Under current law, animal feed is not taxed at any point, except when it is sitting in a store as inventory. At the time of year when property taxes are calculated, feed sellers’ warehouses are generally fully stocked due to the seasonal needs of the agriculture business. As a result of these large inventories, sellers have to pay high taxes, which are then passed on to consumers through higher prices. By reducing retailer costs, exempting feed held by retailers from property tax would help make animal feed more affordable for Texans.
Opponents Say:
By establishing an exemption for animal feed, Prop 5 would give an unfair tax benefit to feed sellers. Almost all other forms of inventory are subject to property tax. The state should not create a special exemption for this particular type of inventory under the Tax Code.
Analysis provided by House Research Organization
Legislation
Bill: HJR 4
Authors: Meyer | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment prohibiting the legislature from enacting a law imposing an occupation tax on certain entities that enter into transactions conveying securities or imposing a tax on certain securities transactions."
Supporters Say:
Prop 6 would protect the earnings of Texas investors and boost the Texas economy by amending the state Constitution to prohibit taxes on securities transactions and occupations. As the Texas Stock Exchange is in the process of being established and other national stock exchanges consider moving to the state, it is important to prevent taxes that would have a detrimental effect on the Texas economy. Financial-transaction taxes raise transaction costs, which can lead to decreased trade volume, lower asset prices, less efficient markets, increases in the cost of capital, and increases in the cost of consumer goods.
Prop 6 would benefit Texas taxpayers and assure investors that Texas is committed to providing a low-tax, business-friendly environment.
Opponents Say:
Prop 6 would make it harder for future legislatures to make tax policy by including a prohibition on securities transaction taxes in the state constitution. The state may experience an economic downturn and could benefit from having a securities transaction or occupation tax to raise revenues at that time.
Analysis provided by House Research Organization
Legislation
Bill: HJR 133
Authors: Turner | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homestead of the surviving spouse of a veteran who died as a result of a condition or disease that is presumed under federal law to have been service-connected."
Supporters Say:
Prop 7 would provide tax relief to the surviving spouses of deceased veterans whose deaths were the result of qualifying diseases and conditions related to their military service under the PACT Act, a 2022 federal law that expanded health benefits for veterans with toxic exposures and included presumptive service-connected conditions for such veterans.
Currently, the state entitles a property tax exemption to veterans who have a 100 percent service-connected disability, and this exemption transfers to the veteran’s surviving spouse after the veteran’s death. While this measure provides support to some veteran families, the surviving spouses of veterans who were denied disability before the PACT Act was passed have been excluded from receiving the corresponding property tax exemptions that they are entitled to.
Prop 7 would correct this discrepancy to ensure that the surviving spouses of deceased veterans who had qualified for the property tax exemption were awarded the appropriate property tax relief. Although the resolution could pass tax burdens on to others, this amendment would apply to a narrow population of qualifying surviving spouses and greatly benefit military communities.
Opponents Say:
By expanding property tax exemptions to the spouses of deceased veterans, the resolution could burden other taxpayers with disproportionately higher tax rates, especially near military bases and surrounding areas where there are larger populations of veteran families who would qualify for such an exemption.
Analysis provided by House Research Organization
Legislation
Bill: HJR 2
Authors: Geren | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment to prohibit the legislature from imposing death taxes applicable to a decedent’s property or the transfer of an estate, inheritance, legacy, succession, or gift."
Supporters Say:
Proposition 8 would ensure that no death tax could be imposed in Texas by creating a constitutional prohibition, which would help guarantee that heirs and beneficiaries could continue to retain property and assets after the passing of a loved one. Death taxes can be burdensome and could lead to estate-planning and tax-avoidance strategies that are inefficient. The money that a person leaves at their death has already been taxed once, and the government should be limited in the number of times it can tax the same assets. Although Texas does not currently have a death tax, Prop 8 would ensure that future legislatures could not institute one.
Opponents Say:
Amending the state Constitution to prohibit a death tax that does not currently exist could hinder future legislatures from acting in the best interest of the state and lead to unintended consequences. Constitutional amendments should be reserved for the most critical matters concerning the state, and there is currently no proposal in the Legislature to institute a death tax.
Analysis provided by House Research Organization
Legislation
Bill: HJR 1
Authors: Meyer | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment to authorize the legislature to exempt from ad valorem taxation a portion of the market value of tangible personal property a person owns that is held or used for the production of income."
Texas REALTORS® Support Because:
Prop 9 will contribute to economic growth and reduce administrative burdens for Texas business owners by authorizing the Legislature to exempt $250,000 of business personal property, or tangible personal property held or used to produce income, from property taxes.
This amendment would reduce the tax burden on businesses, allowing them to reinvest these savings to expand their operations. Prop 9 also would incentivize businesses to move to Texas or remain in the state to take advantage of the exemption. In addition, the resolution could reduce the need for businesses to move inventory or equipment to avoid paying business personal property taxes on these items.
Complying with business personal property taxes can be onerous for small businesses, as it requires documenting all assets and reporting acquisition prices and dates and depreciation schedules. The comptroller’s tax formulas can be complicated and often overestimate the value of business personal property, while protesting these determinations can be costly and time-consuming. Prop 9 would reduce these administrative and compliance burdens for business owners whose business personal property did not exceed $125,000 in value. Additionally, the resolution would reduce administrative burdens for county appraisal districts by reducing the number of businesses on their tax rolls.
While some have suggested that this would reduce state and local tax revenue, the impact would be minor. Most of the revenue from the business personal property tax comes from a small number of large businesses, which would still be required to pay taxes on all business personal property over $125,000. Although local governments could experience some reduction in tax revenue, the potential economic benefits resulting from the bill would outweigh these losses.
Legislation
Bill: SJR 84
Authors: Bettencourt | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment to authorize the legislature to provide for a temporary exemption from ad valorem taxation of the appraised value of an improvement to a residence homestead that is completely destroyed by a fire."
Supporters Say:
Prop 10 would authorize the Legislature to establish a temporary property tax exemption of the appraised value of an improvement to a person’s residence homestead that was completely destroyed by a fire. The Legislature could prescribe the duration of the exemption and could provide additional eligibility requirements.
Opponents Say:
No opposition recorded
Analysis provided by House Research Organization
Legislation
Bill: SJR 85
Authors: Bettencourt | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to increase the amount of the exemption from ad valorem taxation by a school district of the market value of the residence homestead of a person who is elderly or disabled."
Texas REALTORS® Support Because:
Prop 11 would increase the residence homestead property tax exemption for individuals who are elderly and disabled from $10,000 to $60,000. This would increase housing affordability and provide protection for a vulnerable population. Many individuals who qualify for this exemption live on a fixed income and face rising medical insurance costs. Individuals who are elderly and disabled also often have to make expensive modifications to their homes, such as adding ramps or accessibility features to accommodate walkers, wheelchairs, and other medical devices. Providing an increase in the homestead exemption for these individuals would help them to stay in their homes and their neighborhoods. Keeping seniors in the homes they’ve lived in for decades is especially valuable, as it contributes to continuity and stability in the community.
Prop 11 would provide visible and understandable tax relief to a large segment of the state’s population. Homestead exemptions are a particularly beneficial form of tax relief because taxpayers can clearly see the reduction in their tax bill, which encourages support for the tax system overall.
School districts would not experience a reduction in funding because SB 23, the enabling legislation, would make up for losses caused by the increase in the homestead exemption by providing additional state general revenue.
Legislation
Bill: SJR 27
Authors: Huffman | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment regarding the membership of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, the membership of the tribunal to review the commission’s recommendations, and the authority of the commission, the tribunal, and the Texas Supreme Court to more effectively sanction judges and justices for judicial misconduct."
Supporters Say:
Prop 12 would promote transparency and accountability in the judicial system by reforming the composition and authority of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, which was created to promote the integrity, competence, and impartiality of the judiciary.
SCJC has not sufficiently protected the rights of Texas citizens who have experienced the consequences of abuses of judicial power and failures of competency. The proposed amendment would institute common sense reforms that would allow judicial misconduct to be addressed fairly and swiftly. The resolution would improve transparency by restricting the option for SCJC to issue private sanctions. It would include more public representation on the commission to increase independence and fairness in judicial oversight. And the proposed amendment would require more practical action to be taken to determine if a judge’s decision was motivated by an improper motive, such as bias, revenge, or anger, and to ensure procedural requirements that maintain fundamental rights are upheld.
Opponents Say:
Prop 12 would threaten the continuity of SCJC by ending the terms of all sitting commissioners at the same time at the end of the year. The time it would take to train new commissioners could lead to further delays in the resolution of complaints. Additionally, increasing the number of public members could create an opportunity for more politicization and partisanship in the judicial discipline process.
Analysis provided by House Research Organization
Legislation
Bill: SJR 2
Authors: Bettencourt | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment to increase the amount of the exemption of residence homesteads from ad valorem taxation by a school district from $100,000 to $140,000.
Texas REALTORS® Support Because:
Prop 13 would provide Texas homeowners with significant tax relief and encourage economic growth by increasing the school district residence homestead property tax exemption from $100,000 to $140,000. School taxes amount to the largest share of property owners’ tax growth, and taxpayers need additional tax relief, as many of the gains from tax relief passed in previous sessions have been lost due to increases in tax rates by local governments.
An increase in the homestead tax exemption would provide broad-based tax relief to all homeowners and would be a meaningful tax benefit to a large number of Texans. The resolution would particularly benefit elderly homeowners, many of whom live on fixed incomes and face increasing healthcare expenses and rising insurance rates.
Prop 13 also would help first-time home buyers who often do not have excess money to spend on taxes and normally have substantial mortgage payments in addition to other home expenses. Additionally, the resolution would benefit the economy by encouraging home purchases and boosting the real estate market.
Prop 13 would not cause a loss of funding for school districts as a result of the higher exemption because the state would make up the difference using general revenue under state aid formulas provided in current law and the enabling legislation, SB 4. Prop 13 would provide lasting, meaningful tax relief to a broad cross-section of the tax base while ensuring funding for important priorities was maintained.
Legislation
Bill: SJR 3
Authors: Huffman | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment providing for the establishment of the Dementia Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, establishing the Dementia Prevention and Research Fund to provide money for research on and prevention and treatment of dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, and related disorders in this state, and transferring to that fund $3 billion from state general revenue."
Supporters Say:
By authorizing the creation of the Dementia Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, Prop 14 would help make Texas a leader in combating dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and other degenerative neurological disorders. The bill would allow for a major investment in research focused on the prevention and treatment of such diseases, improving the health and quality of life of millions of Texans and benefiting the state’s economy. The impact of dementia and related diseases is growing due to a rapidly aging population and increased life expectancy, and the need for increased investment in research, prevention, and treatment is urgent. Dementia is a leading cause of death in the U.S., while Texas ranks high among other states in Alzheimer’s cases and deaths. Lack of neurological medical care is especially acute in some regions of the state, which impacts the ability of individuals to receive critical care.
Prop 14 would accelerate innovation in dementia research by providing grants through DPRIT, which would be modeled in certain respects after the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT), the state’s institute for funding cancer research. CPRIT has successfully attracted excellent cancer researchers and doctors to Texas and provided a significant economic return on the state’s investment. DPRIT also would help to attract top research talent to the state and create high-quality jobs. By advancing efforts to mitigate the causes and effects of dementia, DPRIT could help relieve caregiving costs in the state, which can burden families for many years. DPRIT also would augment current research efforts by facilitating collaboration among medical and scientific experts.
Texas’ business-friendly regulatory environment provides advantages that ideally position the state to take on the challenge of combating dementia and become a major center of biomedical research. While some have questioned the place of government in funding such research, Texas’ current budget surplus presents a unique opportunity to improve the lives of millions in Texas and beyond. Additionally, DPRIT could facilitate types of research, such as projects focused on prevention, that might not be pursued by private entities alone, since they may not be especially profitable.
Opponents Say:
While combatting dementia is a worthwhile goal, Prop 14 would create an open-ended, long term financial risk for taxpayers outside the proper scope of government, and there are other appropriate priorities for public funds. Private industry, nonprofits, and universities are capable of addressing the problem without government involvement in research. Prop 14 also would create a new state bureaucracy without sufficient accountability measures.
Prop 14 would model DPRIT on CPRIT, which itself has had problems with a lack of accountability in the use of public money. DPRIT could be more problematic than CPRIT because dementia research is broader and more ambiguous in scope than cancer research, and because DPRIT would involve more bureaucratic layers and political appointees, which could increase inefficiency and potential for favoritism.
Analysis provided by House Research Organization
Legislation
Bill: SJR 34
Authors: Hughes | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment establishing parents as the primary decision-makers for their children."
Supporters Say:
Prop 15 would reinforce the fundamental role of parents in raising their children without unnecessary government intervention. It upholds personal responsibility by ensuring that parents retain decision-making authority rather than deferring to state oversight. Additionally, it supports limited government by restricting state interference to cases where there is a compelling interest, such as protecting a child from harm.
Opponents Say:
Prop 15 raises concerns about the potential for government overreach, with opponents arguing that the amendment's language, specifically the phrase ""the people of Texas hereby affirm that a parent has the responsibility to nurture and protect the parent's child…,"" could be interpreted as imposing obligations on parents rather than solely limiting government interference.
There's a concern that the government might leverage a parent's perceived failure to meet these ""vaguely worded responsibilities"" to justify intervening in their child's upbringing, essentially using the amendment against the parent's rights.
Opponents further question who determines what constitutes a ""compelling governmental interest"" that would allow for state interference with parental rights, arguing that judges could interpret this clause in a way that allows for violations of parental rights, particularly in cases involving child protective services (CPS) or custody disputes.
Some critics express concern that the amendment, despite appearing to protect parental rights, doesn't adequately address how these rights will be protected when judges or the state potentially disregard or misinterpret the amendment.
Legislation
Bill: SJR 37
Authors: Birdwell | et al.
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment clarifying that a voter must be a United States citizen."
Supporters Say:
While Texas law and federal law already limit voting rights to U.S. citizens, the current Texas Constitution does not explicitly list non-citizens among those disqualified from voting. This proposal seeks to eliminate any ambiguity by adding a clear constitutional prohibition. The aim is to bolster the legal and symbolic clarity of citizenship requirements and prevent any future legal or policy challenges that might seek to expand voting rights to non-citizens, including in local elections.
Opponents Say:
Prop 16 is unnecessary because current Texas law and voter registration regulations already restrict voting to U.S. citizens.
Critics also argue that non-citizen voting is not a prevalent issue in Texas, implying the amendment is an overreaction to a non-existent problem.
Legislation
Bill: HJR 34
Authors: Guillen
Ballot Language:
"The constitutional amendment to authorize the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of the amount of the market value of real property located in a county that borders the United Mexican States that arises from the installation or construction on the property of border security infrastructure and related improvements."
Supporters Say:
Prop 17 would incentivize property owners to volunteer their property for border security enhancements by amending the Constitution to authorize the Legislature to exempt that portion of the assessed value of a person's property from property taxes. While Texas pays a one-time fee to property owners at the Texas-Mexico border who voluntarily sign easement contracts to host the border wall, there is currently no tax exemption available to property owners for such border security infrastructure. Some landowners may hesitate to install border security measures due to potential increases in taxable property value. By providing an exemption for the assessed value of the property associated with the border security infrastructure, the resolution would encourage private property owners to support border security efforts without facing increased tax burdens.
The tax exemption authorized under the resolution would be provided for the value of the infrastructure installed on the property and any increase in property value from the improvements, and would not reduce the appraised value of the existing property.
Additionally, the resolution would not require a property owner to install border security infrastructure and would only apply to property in counties along the Texas-Mexico border. Individuals who volunteer to help establish and maintain border security infrastructure on their property should be rewarded for contributing to the state’s efforts to secure the southern border.
Opponents Say:
The state should not provide tax exemptions that incentivize further border security infrastructure construction on private land, especially for state-supported construction of walls or the installation of surveillance equipment.
Additionally, Prop 17 would narrow the tax base and could shift the tax burden onto other property owners by removing property value from the tax rolls. The Legislature should focus on providing broad-based tax relief rather than carving out certain limited exemptions.
Analysis provided by House Research Organization