Explaining eight amendments to Louisiana Constitution for voters – Daily Advertiser

LSU football, Brian Kelly press conference before Tennessee game

Recapping LSU football, Brian Kelly's opening week press conference ahead of Saturday's matchup against Tennessee.

Koki Riley, Lafayette Daily Advertiser

To say that the Louisiana Constitution is fluid is an understatement. Since it was ratified in 1974, voters have approved 203 amendments.

And they'll have to decide whether to approve or reject eight more changes to the state Constitution in the Nov. 8 election.

The proposed list of amendments addresses everything from taxes to a clarification on slavery and "involuntary servitude."

Following is an abridged and edited explanation of the amendments from the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, which provides a guide without taking a position. For PAR's full guide to the proposed amendments with detailed explanations go to http://parlouisiana.org/:

A vote for would: Let the state increase to 65% the maximum amount of money in seven different trust funds that can be invested in equities on the stock market.

A vote against would: Keep tighter limits in place on the percentage of the trust funds money that can be invested in the stock market, with some unable to be invested in equities at all.

Argument for: Increasing the trust funds investments in the stock market could generate more earnings over the long term to benefit health, education, wildlife and other programs that receive the money.

Argument against: The stock market is volatile and exposes the trust funds to greater risk and loss possibilities in the short term.

A vote for would: Increase the property tax exemption available to veterans with service-related disabilities and to their surviving spouses after the veterans death to up to $150,000.

A vote against would: Maintain the current level of property tax exemption available to veterans with service-related disabilities and to their surviving spouses.

Argument for: Louisiana veterans and their spouses may have a difficult time supporting their households after losing a substantial portion of their annual income and the veterans ability to maintain a job.

Argument against: Special property tax breaks that have been granted over the years erode the tax revenue available to local government agencies that provide services.

A vote for would: Allow most of Louisianas civil service employees to support certain campaign activities of a candidate for public office when that candidate is an immediate family member.

A vote against would: Continue the current prohibition on Louisianas civil service employees participating in campaign activities or supporting candidates for public office.

Argument for: People, no matter their jobs, should be able to support family members if they are running for political office. Limits on First Amendment rights to freedom of speech should be as narrowly tailored as possible.

Argument against: The prohibitions on political activity for civil service workers were enacted to protect taxpayersfinancing the salaries of the employees, to curb inappropriate acts by employees who are supposed to do their work in a nonpartisan fashion and to protect the workers from political retaliation and undue influence.

A vote for would: Let local water districts, municipalities or other political subdivisions reduce customer bills for water use if the charges stem from water lost due to damage outside a customers control.

A vote against would: Keep local water districts, municipalities and other political subdivisions from lowering bills or waiving customer charges for water use in almost all circumstances.

Argument for: Water system administrators should have flexibility to help customers if bills were improperly increased by damage out of the control of a customer, such as infrastructure problems caused during an ice storm, flood or other disaster.

Argument against: Allowing widespread waivers of customer charges undermines system sustainability, taking awaymuch-needed money from systems already struggling with outdated infrastructure. Changing theprohibition makes system administrators more vulnerable to outside political pressure.

A vote for would: Give local taxing bodies more time to decide if they want to roll forward millages that increase property taxes paid by businesses and homeowners.

A vote against would: Keep the rules governing millage roll forwards the same, giving local taxing bodies until the next property reappraisals to make the decision.

Argument for: Many taxing districts automatically choose to roll forward their millage rates to the maximum allowable because they fear losing the decision-making ability in the future after another property reassessment. The use-it-or-lose-it aspect of a millage rate means homeowners and businesses pay higher property taxes in the short-term than they might otherwise pay if the taxing bodies had more time to make those financial decisions. Taxing authorities should have more time to decide if theyll need the increased tax revenue.

Argument against: Taxing districts have enough time under the current system to make budgetary decisions about whether they need the full millage rate authorized for them. They shouldnt be allowed to roll forward millage rates for years on end, a situation that would increase property tax payment uncertainty for homeowners and businesses.

A vote for would: Limit increases in the property tax liability of homes subject to homestead exemption in Orleans Parish, capping the reassessment increase to 10% of the residential propertys assessed value in the previous year.

A vote against would: Continue the current system, which requires a four-year phase-in of tax liability for homes subject to the homestead exemption when a reappraisal increases assessments by more than 50%.

Argument for: The annual 10% cap on reassessed value gives homeowners the time to adjust to higher payments and eases the sticker shock of large reassessments as property value skyrockets in Orleans.

Argument against: Special property tax breaks that have been granted over the years erode the tax revenue availableto local government agencies that provide services. This could lower revenue collections in Orleans Parish, which already is struggling to maintain services.

Editor's note: Amendment No. 7 was rewritten after the bill was introduced. The rewritten language has been interpreted in different ways, with varying implications. Those conflicting interpretations have raised concerns from the bill sponsor, who said his intent was to restrict the use of involuntary servitude, not broaden it, and who said he intends to oppose the amendment.

A vote for would: Rework the state constitutional ban on slavery and involuntary servitude, allowing their use only for the lawful administration of criminal justice.

A vote against would: Keep the states current constitutional language banning slavery and involuntary servitude, but allowing involuntary servitude as a punishment for crime.

Argument for: The current provision is antiquated and tied to Louisianas history of slavery, segregation and convictleasing. The new language creates a set of circumstances when involuntary servitude is allowed. Many other states dont have the language in their constitutions at all and have found ways to allow prison labor.

Argument against: The new language is ambiguous and doesnt change anything about prison conditions and allowance of prison labor. The revisions could be interpreted to broaden the allowed uses of slavery and involuntary servitude in the criminal justice system. The rewrite is unnecessary because the U.S. Constitution already outlaws slavery and involuntary servitude except for those convicted of crimes.

A vote for would: Remove the requirement that certain property owners with disabilities annually certify their income to receive a property tax rate freeze.

A vote against would: Continue the annual income certification required for certain property owners with disabilities to receive a property tax rate freeze.

Argument for: People with permanent and total disabilities deserve the same treatment as those who are 65 andolder for the property tax rate freeze.

Argument against: Requiring people who receive special assessment levels to recertify their income serves as an important check and balance to ensure they continue to meet the criteria.

GregHilburncovers state politics for the USA TODAY Network of Louisiana. Follow him on Twitter @GregHilburn1.

Read more from the original source:
Explaining eight amendments to Louisiana Constitution for voters - Daily Advertiser