Limestone County Nov. 5, 2019, election results
Mexia News Staff Report
The results of the Nov. 5 Constitutional Amendment Election in Limestone County mirrored those statewide, with Proposition 1 defeated, while the other nine propositions passed.
It seems the voters did not like the idea of allowing someone to hold more than one municipal judge position simultaneously. The main difference in county versus state results is that Proposition 4, which would prohibit a state income tax, was supported by 10 percent more voters in Limestone County than statewide.
The numbers below are the unofficial total. The results will become official once county commissioners canvass them at their next meeting, which is scheduled for Tuesday, Nov. 12.
According to Limestone County Elections Administrator Jennifer Southard, a total of 2,074 Limestone County voters of the 13,354 registered to vote went to the polls in the Nov. 5 Constitutional Amendments Election in the county’s 21 precincts between the time early voting started and Election Day. That represents 15.5 percent of registered voters who voted.
In other recent elections, in November 2018, 6,957 people voted out of 13,635 registered voters, or 51 percent.
In November 2017, 1,138 people voted of 11,249 registered, or 10 percent.
In November 2016, 7,828 people voted of 13,827 registered voters, or 56 percent.
In November 2015, 1,623 of 13,046 registered voters, or 12 percent.
In November 2014, 4,350 people voted out of 13,408 registered voters, or 32 percent.
In November 2013, 892 people voted of 13,033 registered voters, or 6 percent.
Tuesday's results are shown below, with the statewide results beside them.
State Proposition 1
"The constitutional amendment permitting a person to hold more than one office as a municipal judge at the same time."
Votes for 706 (34.57 percent) - State for 681,139 (34.56 percent)
Votes against 1,336 (65.43 percent) - State against 1,289,626 (65.44 percent)
State Proposition 2
“The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of additional general obligation bonds by the Texas Water Development Board in an amount not to exceed $200 million to provide financial assistance for the development of certain projects in economically distressed areas.
Votes for 1,289 (63.28 percent) - State for 1,285,397 (65.62 percent)
Votes against 748 (36.72 percent) - State against 673,306 (34.38 percent)
State Proposition 3
"The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for a temporary exemption from ad valorem taxation of a portion of the appraised value of certain property damaged by a disaster."
Votes for 1,731 (84.81 percent) - State for 1,667,110 (85.09 percent)
Votes against 310 (15.19 percent) - State against 292,031 (14.91 percent)
State Proposition 4
"The constitutional amendment prohibiting the imposition of an individual income tax, including a tax on an individual's share of partnership and unincorporated association income."
Votes for 1,771 (85.89 percent) - State for 1,467,994 (74.41 percent)
Votes against 291 (14.11 percent) - State against 504,848 (25.59 percent)
State Proposition 5
"The constitutional amendment dedicating the revenue received from the existing state sales and use taxes that are imposed on sporting goods to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and the Texas Historical Commission to protect Texas' natural areas, water quality, and history by acquiring, managing, and improving state and local parks and historic sites while not increasing the rate of the state sales and use taxes."
Votes for 1,802 (87.73 percent) - State for 1,732,331 (88 percent)
Votes against 252 (12.27 percent) - State against 236,251 (12 percent)
State Proposition 6
“The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to increase by $3 billion the maximum bond amount authorized for the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas.”
Votes for 1,320 (64.58 percent) - State for 1,250,089 (64 percent)
Votes against 724 (35.42 percent) - State against 703,157 (36 percent)
State Proposition 7
"The constitutional amendment allowing increased distributions to the available school fund."
Votes for 1,403 (68.54 percent) - State for 1,449,333 (74.12 percent)
Votes against 644 (31.46 percent) - State against 506,142 (25.88 percent)
State Proposition 8
"The constitutional amendment providing for the creation of the flood infrastructure fund to assist in the financing of drainage, flood mitigation, and flood control projects."
Votes for 1,475 (72.06 percent) - State for 1,527,394 (77.83 percent)
Votes against 572 (27.94 percent) - State against 435,184 (22.17 percent)
State Proposition 9
“The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to exempt from ad valorem taxation precious metal held in a precious metal depository located in this state.”
Votes for 1,145 (56.71 percent) - State for 977,272 (51.6 percent)
Votes against 874 (43.29 percent) - State against 916,513 (48.4 percent)
State Proposition 10
“The constitutional amendment to allow the transfer of a law enforcement animal to a qualified caretaker in certain circumstances.”
Votes for 1,942 (94.64 percent) - State for 1,845,766 (93.75 percent)
Votes against 110 (5.36 percent) - State against 123,032 (6.25 percent)