HJR 11 proposes a constitutional amendment to limit the growth of state and local appropriations in Texas. It defines “all funds appropriations” broadly to include general revenue, dedicated accounts in general revenue, general-revenue-related funds, other state and local funds, and federal funds held in state or local treasuries. The measure would require the rate of growth in appropriations to stay within a limit tied to the average taxpayer’s ability to pay for government, with the Legislative Budget Board responsible for calculating and adopting the applicable limit before each regular legislative session.
The resolution also creates a supermajority exception: the state legislature or a local government entity could exceed the limit only if three-fourths of the members approve a resolution identifying the amount above the limit and the nature of the emergency. In addition, any “over-collected taxpayer money” would be returned by reducing tax rates, as determined by the state or local entity. The proposal would be submitted to voters on November 4, 2025, and would take effect only if a related constitutional amendment authorizing an appropriations limitation is approved.
Impact
If adopted, HJR 11 would amend the Texas Constitution to impose a new spending-growth limit on both state and local governments, affecting budgeting practices across multiple fund sources and levels of government. It would give the Legislative Budget Board a formal role in setting the limit and would constrain appropriations unless a supermajority approves an emergency override. The measure would also direct tax-rate reductions when revenues exceed the spending-growth limit, potentially affecting state and local tax policy, fiscal planning, and the use of surplus revenue.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no direct evidence of debate, amendments, or recorded support/opposition in the materials provided. Based on the text alone, the resolution reflects a strong fiscal-restraint and taxpayer-relief approach, emphasizing limits on government growth and automatic tax reduction when collections exceed the cap. The proposal appears designed to appeal to advocates of spending discipline and tax reduction.
Contention
The main points of contention likely concern the breadth of the spending cap, the use of the average taxpayer’s ability to pay as the benchmark, and the requirement that any override receive a three-fourths vote. Critics could argue that the limit is too restrictive, could hamper responses to emergencies or population growth, and may reduce flexibility for both state and local governments. Supporters would likely favor the measure as a safeguard against government expansion and a mechanism to return excess revenue to taxpayers through lower tax rates.