Texas' parks and historic sites will begin receiving more funding and it will be harder for future Texas Legislatures to impose a state income tax after voters across the state on Tuesday passed nine of 10 amendments to the constitution.

With 3,353 ballots cast, Palo Pinto County results practically mirrored the statewide vote in all 10 proposition votes.

Voters in the Graford ISD rejected a proposed $49.6 million new school bond by a 2-1 margin with 608 ballots cast.

The only state constitutional amendment proposition rejected was Proposition 1, which sought to allow a person to hold more than one municipal judge office at a time.

County voters passed by the widest margin Proposition 5 with 91 percent in favor of a constitutional amendment to use existing sporting good tax revenues to fund state and local parks and historic sites improvements. Approving the measure does not create a new tax, but ensures revenues from the current tax are dedicated for the originally intended purpose.

Before Tuesday's election, trying to impose a state income tax would have been no easy task. The state constitution already required the Legislature, through a simply majority vote in each chamber, put a referendum on the ballot for voters to approve or reject.

By passing Proposition 4, voters have constitutionally banned a state income tax that will now require

a two-thirds vote in each legislative chamber and a statewide referendum to repeal or amend the ban. Eighty-six percent of the county ballots voted for the constitutional ban, with 74% of voters across Texas in approval.

Here are the statewide and final but unofficial Palo Pinto County election results:

PROPOSITION 1 – “The constitutional amendment permitting a person to hold more than one office as a municipal judge at the same time.”

Statewide

Yes – 35%

No – 65%

Palo Pinto County

Yes – 36%

No – 64%

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.”

Statewide

Yes – 66%

No – 34%

Palo Pinto County

Yes – 64%

No – 36%

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.”

Statewide

Yes – 85%

No – 15%

Palo Pinto County

Yes – 85%

No – 15%

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.”

Statewide

Yes – 74%

No – 26%

Palo Pinto County

Yes – 86%

No – 14%

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.”

Statewide

Yes – 88%

No – 12%

Palo Pinto County

Yes – 91%

No – 9%

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.”

Statewide

Yes – 64%

No – 36%

Palo Pinto County

Yes – 60%

No – 40%

PROPOSITION 7 – “The constitutional amendment allowing increased distributions to the available school fund.”

Statewide

Yes – 74%

No – 26%

Palo Pinto County

Yes – 71%

No – 29%

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.”

Statewide

Yes – 78%

No – 22%

Palo Pinto County

Yes – 70%

No – 30%

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.”

Statewide

Yes – 52%

No – 48%

Palo Pinto County

Yes – 56%

No – 44%

PROPOSITION 10 – “The constitutional amendment to allow the transfer of a law enforcement animal to a qualified caretaker in certain circumstances.”

Statewide

Yes – 94%

No – 6%

Palo Pinto County

Yes – 95%

No – 5%

GRAFORD ISD PROPOSITION A

For – 33%

Against – 67%

Recommended for you