Proposed Amendments

I promised a review of statewide races, so let’s start with the easy ones: The proposed Amendments to the state constitution:

Amendment 1

This would increase the state reserve fund from $5 billion now, to about $12.5 billion. The amendment proposes adding $750 million a year to the fund until the new amount is reached, meaning paying into it for the next 10 years, at least. I’m voting no. In general, I am voting no on every single resolution that involves the government getting more money.

Amendment 2

An amendment to the State Constitution to exempt tangible personal property for land that is classified for agricultural and the land from ad valorem taxation. Normally, as I said this would be a yes for me. This one is a bit trickier than that. Developers in the state already use the “agricultural” classification to get bigger tax breaks. They put a cow or two on the land, never actually farm it, but reap the tax benefits.

Colloquially known as the “Rent-A-Cow” loophole, this strategy allows land speculators and builders to slash their property taxes by up to 97% on prime commercial or residential land. They do this by leasing the land to cattle ranchers or putting a few cows on it to maintain a “bona fide” agricultural status right up until they pave it over for subdivisions.

Historically, Disney famously used this loophole for decades, keeping a small herd of cattle on undeveloped portions of its theme park empire to save millions in property taxes. I’m voting no, mostly because I am opposed to special carve outs designed to help one set of people at the expense of another.

Amendment 3:

This one increases the homestead exemption in a staged manner from its current $50,000 to $150,000 in the first year, and $250,000 in the second. I’m voting yes on this one.

That’s it for the statewide amendments.