WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HJR 213

Proposing a constitutional amendment to require a supermajority vote to authorize a political subdivision to issue general obligation bonds.

89th Legislature (2025) Introduced by Ellen Troxclair

Texas HJR 213 would require supermajority voter approval for local government general obligation bond issuance, raising the threshold above simple majority and potentially restricting local infrastructure financing.

Referred to Pensions, Investments & Financial Services
#bonds(s6060) #citygovernment--finance(i0062) #countygovernment--finance(i0097) #education--primary&secondary--finance(i0250) #elections--general(i0310) #politicalsubdivisions(i0588) #resolutions--constitutionalamendments(i0661) #taxation--city(i0775) #taxation--county(i0780) #taxation--property-assessment&collection(i0798) #taxation--property-miscellaneous(i0797) #taxation--property-taxrate(i0794) #taxation--schooldistrict(i0785)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HJR 213

Legislative bill overview

HJR 213 proposes a constitutional amendment requiring Texas political subdivisions (cities, counties, school districts, etc.) to obtain a supermajority vote—rather than a simple majority—before issuing general obligation bonds. This would apply to local ballot measures where communities approve debt financing for infrastructure, schools, and other public projects.

Why is this important

General obligation bonds are a primary funding mechanism for local capital projects like school buildings, roads, and water systems. Raising the voting threshold from 50% to a supermajority (typically 60% or higher) makes it substantially harder for communities to approve borrowing, potentially limiting local infrastructure investment and requiring communities to find alternative funding sources or defer projects.

Potential points of contention

  • Fiscal conservatism vs. infrastructure needs: Proponents argue supermajority requirements prevent excessive municipal debt; opponents contend they obstruct necessary public investments in schools and infrastructure that communities want.
  • Democratic process questions: Critics note supermajority requirements can override majority preferences and give concentrated opposition power disproportionate influence over community-wide decisions.
  • Disparate impact: Rural and economically disadvantaged communities may face greater difficulty meeting higher thresholds, potentially widening resource gaps across the state.
  • Scope ambiguity: Unclear whether the amendment applies to all political subdivisions equally or includes exemptions for certain districts or emergency situations.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.