Mixed bag

Of the 10 proposed state constitutional amendments on Tuesday’s ballot, half would waive constitutional limits on agencies’ ability to incur debt. We understand the need for such limits, and believe that if officials plan to routinely defy them, then they should scrap the appearance of fiscal responsibility, and give approval authority to the legislature, so that the Constitution isn’t cluttered with hundreds of amendments waiving fiscal restrictions for the same thing every few years.

Other proposals seek to give authority for some procedures, or remove restrictions that impede communities’ ability to work with their neighbors for mutual benefit. Some of these proposals warrant support, others raise concerns.

Proposition 5 would enable neighboring cities or counties to enter into interlocal agreements by waiving the requirement that they ensure that they have a tax stream to pay for the services they provide to their neighboring political entity.

Interlocal agreements enable those entities to enter each other’s jurisdiction and help each other, in order to maximize resources and respond more efficiently.

It’s unknown how much each city might be called on to help its neighbors, and its efforts often are repaid in kind when the roles are reversed in another emergency. Thus, the taxation requirement seems more of a bureaucratic burden than a practical measure. We support passage of this proposition.

We also support Proposition 1, which would extend property tax exemptions currently given to disabled veterans to their surviving spouses. In most cases, the surviving is comparable in age to the veteran, and the loss of a life partner needn’t be compounded by the sudden imposition of property taxes.

Opponents to this proposition point to the state’s fiscal troubles and say we shouldn’t remove a revenue stream, but fairness should win out. The best way to deal with the state’s budget problems is to cut expenses, not look for new revenue.

In the same vein, we oppose Proposition 8, which would enable the imposition of property taxes on open land based on water use. This primarily affects agricultural land, which already is taxed according to its productive capacity. The amount of water used on these lands is largely determined by the amount of crops or livestock on the land, and on annual rainfall, which no mortal can control. Extreme drought and wildfires, which much of the state has endured this year, can devastate landowners, and they don’t need to be penalized for having to use more water under these conditions.

Proposition 9 would allow the governor to grant a pardon to a convicted criminal who completes the court’s requirements for deferred adjudication. Seems innocuous enough, since the person has paid his or her debt to society. However, the provision actually is a means of letting nonviolent offenders hide their convictions from the public. This violates the intent of open government, and we oppose the measure.

We also note the lack of officials opposition to Proposition 10, which would lengthen the amount of time elected officials could serve before they must vacate their office in order to run for another position. Officials commonly campaign for new offices but refrain from announcing their candidacy so that they won’t have to resign their positions, as the Constitution currently requires. Because the current requirement is so easy to get around, the issue is moot.

Some voters might not consider many of the propositions important, but they should consider the possibility that they could someday face unexpected property tax increases, or find that a corrupt official had a criminal record that had been hidden because not enough voters blocked a provision from taking effect. Thus, we encourage everyone who can vote to do so on Tuesday.