Alabama County and Municipality Trust Income, Amendment 3 (2000)
|
|
The Alabama County and Municipality Trust Income Amendment, also known as Amendment 3, was on the ballot in Alabama on November 7, 2000, as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. It was approved. This measure proposed that when the Alabama Trust Fund trust income for a year was, at least, $60 million, the county and municipal governments in the state would receive at least 10% of that income to spend according to the precepts of the general law. The passage of this amendment added Amendment 668 to the Alabama Constitution.[1]
Election results
Alabama Amendment 3 (2000) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
![]() | 848,946 | 69.77% | ||
No | 367,755 | 30.23% |
Election results via: Alabama Votes
Text of measure
The question on the ballot:
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to provide that counties and incorporated municipalities in Alabama receive a minimum of 10 percent of the trust income from the Alabama Trust Fund when the trust income in the preceding fiscal year exceeds sixty million dollars ($60,000,000); and to provide that the funds distributed to the counties and incorporated municipalities shall be expended as provided by general law. (Proposed Act No. 1999-393)[2][3] |
See also
- Alabama 2000 ballot measures
- 2000 ballot measures
- List of Alabama ballot measures
- History of Initiative & Referendum in Alabama
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Alabama Votes, accessed December 3, 2015
- ↑ Alabama Votes, accessed December 3, 2015
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
|
![]() |
State of Alabama Montgomery (capital) |
---|---|
Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |