Texas House Bill HB67

Texas 2025 - 89th 1st C.S.

• Filed: 7/14/25

Caption

Relating to the requirements regarding an election to authorize the issuance of general obligation bonds or to approve an increase in an ad valorem tax rate.

Summary

HB 67 would change how Texas local elections are held and decided when voters are asked to authorize general obligation bonds or approve certain property tax increases. The bill requires elections to authorize general obligation bonds or increase an ad valorem tax rate to be held on the November uniform election date, and it bars those elections from being held as emergency elections. It also directs election authorities to follow that November date even if another law would otherwise require a different date. The bill raises the approval threshold for several local finance measures from a simple majority to a two-thirds vote of those voting. That supermajority standard would apply to the issuance of general obligation bonds and to certain tax-rate elections for taxing units and special districts. HB 67 also revises public notice language in the Tax Code so that notices explain the higher threshold and, in some cases, the relationship between the voter-approval tax rate and the de minimis rate. The bill would apply only to elections ordered on or after its effective date, with most provisions taking effect January 1, 2026.

Impact

HB 67 would amend the Election Code, Government Code, Health and Safety Code, Special District Local Laws Code, and Tax Code to make local bond and tax-rate elections more restrictive. It would require November election timing for bond and ad valorem tax increase elections, impose a two-thirds voter approval requirement for issuing general obligation bonds, and change several existing local tax election provisions from majority approval to supermajority approval. The bill also updates required tax-rate notices to reflect the new voting standard and related terminology, affecting taxing units, special districts, and local voters who participate in these elections.

Sentiment

The available context shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge sentiment directly. Based on the bill’s structure, the measure appears designed to tighten voter control over local debt and property tax increases, which would likely appeal to taxpayers and fiscal conservatives. At the same time, it would be viewed as more restrictive by local governments and districts that rely on bond financing or tax-rate elections to fund operations and capital projects.

Contention

The main point of contention is the higher approval threshold: HB 67 would require two-thirds voter approval instead of a majority for general obligation bonds and certain tax-rate increases. Supporters would likely argue this better protects taxpayers and limits local debt growth, while opponents would likely argue it makes it harder for cities, counties, school-related entities, and special districts to finance infrastructure and essential services. Another likely issue is the mandatory November election date, which could limit flexibility and delay local financing decisions. The bill also interacts with a proposed constitutional amendment for bond elections, making Section 2 contingent on voter approval of that amendment.