Texas Population Requirement for Private Road Work Amendment, Proposition 5 (2015)

• Text of measure
• Background
• Support
• Opposition
• Media editorials
• Path to the ballot
• Texas profile

Proposition 5
Type	Amendment
Origin	Texas Legislature
Topic	Transportation
Status	Approved a

Texas 2015 ballot
Proposition 1 - Taxes
Proposition 2 - Taxes
Proposition 3 - Residency
Proposition 4 - Gambling
Proposition 5 - Roads
Proposition 6 - Hunting
Proposition 7 - Taxes

All 2015 U.S. measures

The Texas Population Requirement for Private Road Work Amendment, Proposition 5 was on the November 3, 2015 ballot in Texas as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved.

Voting yes would have increased the population size for counties allowed to perform private road construction and maintenance from 5,000 to 7,500.

Voting no would have left current laws unchanged. Only counties with populations of 5,000 or less could perform private road construction and maintenance.

Revenue received from private road work is to be used for right-of-way acquisition and the construction and maintenance of public roads.

Election results

Texas Proposition 5
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		1278829	82.74%
No		266782	17.26%

Election results via: Texas Secretary of State

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was:

“

The constitutional amendment to authorize counties with a population of 7,500 or less to perform private road construction and maintenance.

”

Constitutional changes

See also: Article 3, Texas Constitution

The measure amended Section 52f of Article 3 of the Texas Constitution. The following struck-through text was deleted and the underlined text was added:

Sec. 52f.

A county with a population of 7,500 5,000 or less, according to the most recent federal census, may construct and maintain private roads if it imposes a reasonable charge for the work. The Legislature by general law may limit this authority. Revenue received from private road work may be used only for the construction, including right-of-way acquisition, or maintenance of public roads.

Background

Proposition 7

See also: Texas County Road Work, Proposition 7 (1980)

Before 1980, counties were barred from conducting private roadwork or supplying equipment and personnel to conduct private roadwork, although some counties did anyway. The Texas Constitution forbid state and local governments from using public funds to aid private individuals.

Proposition 7 sought to allow private roadwork conducted by counties with populations of 5,000 or less. About 68 percent of voters approved the amendment.

There was an attempt to pass a statute allowing counties to conduct private roadwork in 1975. However, the bill died after the Texas Attorney General issued an opinion claiming this statute would violate the constitution.

The Texas Legislative Council outlined the reasoning behind and in opposition to Proposition 7. Many of these arguments, in support and against, can be applied to the 2015 proposed amendment.

“	FOR 1. In many remote rural counties it is impossible or infeasible to hire a private contractor to perform private road work. By permitting counties to do the work for a reasonable charge, the amendment will alleviate this problem. 2. Small counties must maintain expensive road construction and maintenance equipment even though it may not be required on a full-time basis. They could recoup a part of their investment with the revenue received from private road work. This would help defray the increased costs of their public road programs and might avoid the need for tax increases. 3. The amendment is permissive, not mandatory. Counties need not perform private road work if they so choose, but those counties desiring to perform such work are provided necessary legal authority.	”
—Texas Legislative Council

“	AGAINST 1. Provisions of the Texas Constitution prohibiting the use of public funds for private purposes are a valuable protection against the squandering of public funds. The proposed amendment would undermine this protection by opening the door to a variety of possible abuses. The amendment requires only that counties make a "reasonable charge" for private road work; county governments may be tempted to reward friends with cheap road work. 2. Counties' engaging in the private construction business is an encroachment on private enterprise. Counties will be in direct competition with private construction contractors at a time when the construction industry is financially depressed in many areas. 3. The proposed amendment's population ceiling of 5,000 is rigid and artificial; it is inappropriate for a constitutional provision. If the amendment is adopted, another constitutional amendment will be required if more populous counties are to be included.	”
—Texas Legislative Council

Support

Supporters

Officials

The following state legislators sponsored the measure:

• Sen. Charles Perry (R-28)
• Sen. Kel Seliger (R-31)
• Sen. Robert Nichols (R-3)

Organizations

• County Judges and Commissioners Association of Texas
• Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association

Arguments in favor

The Texas Senate Transportation Committee's analysis contained the following statement of intent:

“

In small counties there are rarely private contractors available, so private roads are often poorly maintained, creating public safety hazards for citizens and emergency services. For years, counties have relied on this provision to maintain these roads and make them passable. To utilize this provision, private landowners must not only consent, but they must pay for this service as well. If the landowner does not wish to have their road paved or does not believe that the cost is a reasonable rate, they do not have to participate. Interested parties report that in the last decade, a certain rural county built a prison that subsequently caused the county to exceed the population threshold. Such parties contend that this case highlights the need to raise the population cap under which a county is authorized to construct and maintain private roads.

”

Referring to SJR 5, state Sen. Robert Nichols said:

“

I am very excited that the House, Senate and governor were able to come together on SJR 5, which is critical for the future of transportation in our state. If passed by the voters, it would be the largest single increase in transportation funding in Texas history.

”

Rep. John Frullo (R-84) said:

“

It’s important for the smaller districts around Lubbock and for the smaller counties.

”

The Texas Legislative Council's analysis of the amendments listed the following arguments supporting the measure:

“

Rural counties in Texas have grown in population in the 35 years since the adoption of Section 52f, Article III, and the constitution should be updated to reflect population growth in that time. The proposed amendment would give rural counties and private landowners in those counties more flexibility to update private roads that are poorly maintained. Many rural counties rarely have private contractors available to do the work. Poorly maintained roads create public safety hazards for citizens and emergency services. Private landowners still would have the flexibility to hire a private company instead of the county if they chose to do so. The proposed amendment would include approximately 20 additional counties with populations between 5,000 and 7,500. Some of the additional counties were under the 5,000-person threshold at the time the constitutional provision was passed in 1980 or at some time since 1980, including some counties that exceeded the 5,000-person threshold only after a prison was constructed in the county. The population limitation is necessary to prevent populous counties from competing with the private road construction industry. However, in the rural counties that would be covered by the proposed amendment, there are no private industries with which to compete, and counties should be allowed to deal with minor projects to maintain road safety. It would not be profitable for private companies to travel to rural counties for minor projects.

”

Opposition

Arguments against

The Texas Legislative Council's analysis of the amendments listed the following arguments supporting the measure:

“

Instead of increasing the maximum population threshold for counties allowed to perform private road work under Section 52f, Article III, the population limit should be eliminated. All counties in the state should have the option to construct and maintain private roads in the county as long as private landowners agree and pay the county for the cost of the work.

”

Media editorials

Support

The Dallas Morning News recommended voting for the amendment, arguing:

“

Texas law permits counties of 5,000 residents or fewer to contract with private landowners to build and maintain roads on their land, provided the landowner is charged a reasonable fee for the work. This authority has existed since 1980 and was designed to help rural landowners build safe roads that connect to public highways when earth-moving and other road-construction equipment isn’t easily available or affordable. When landowners don’t have the ability to contract for county road-construction services, the result tends to be a shoddy and dangerous private road. Proposition 5 does nothing more than boost the population limit to 7,500, which would add 21 counties to the list of those qualified to provide these services. The measure is needed because anomalies, such as the construction of a prison, have caused a qualified county’s population to jump beyond the current threshold. Some might argue that counties shouldn’t be in the business of building private roads, but the only major concern from critics has been that all Texas counties should be allowed to provide these services. We’re not ready to go that far, but we recommend a yes vote on this reasonable measure, especially since it would be largely cost-neutral. Landowners pick up the tab.

”

Oppose

Ballotpedia has not yet found media editorials opposing the proposition. If you are aware of an editorial, please email it to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Path to the ballot

See also: Amending the Texas Constitution

The constitutional amendment was filed by Sen. Charles Perry (R-28) as Senate Joint Resolution 17 on December 5, 2014. The measure passed both chambers unanimously.

A two-thirds vote in both chambers of the Texas State Legislature was required to refer this amendment to the ballot. Texas is one of 16 states that require a two-thirds supermajority vote in both chambers. On April 16, 2015, the Texas Senate approved SJR 17, with 31 senators voting "yea" and none voting "nay." The Texas House of Representatives passed the amendment on May 24, 2015, with 139 representatives voting to refer the measure to the ballot. No legislators voted against referring the amendment to the ballot. It was enrolled the following day, May 25.

Senate vote

April 16, 2015, Senate vote

Texas SJR 17 Senate Vote
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		31	100.00%
No		0	0.00%

House vote

May 24, 2015, House vote

Texas SJR 17 House Vote
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		139	100.00%
No		0	0.00%

State profile

Demographic data for Texas
	Texas	U.S.
Total population:	27,429,639	316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):	261,232	3,531,905
Race and ethnicity**
White:	74.9%	73.6%
Black/African American:	11.9%	12.6%
Asian:	4.2%	5.1%
Native American:	0.5%	0.8%
Pacific Islander:	0.1%	0.2%
Two or more:	2.5%	3%
Hispanic/Latino:	38.4%	17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:	81.9%	86.7%
College graduation rate:	27.6%	29.8%
Income
Median household income:	$53,207	$53,889
Persons below poverty level:	19.9%	11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in Texas. **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

Presidential voting pattern

See also: Presidential voting trends in Texas

Texas voted Republican in all seven presidential elections between 2000 and 2024.

Pivot Counties (2016)

Ballotpedia identified 206 counties that voted for Donald Trump (R) in 2016 after voting for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012. Collectively, Trump won these Pivot Counties by more than 580,000 votes. Of these 206 counties, one is located in Texas, accounting for 0.5 percent of the total pivot counties.

Pivot Counties (2020)

In 2020, Ballotpedia re-examined the 206 Pivot Counties to view their voting patterns following that year's presidential election. Ballotpedia defined those won by Trump won as Retained Pivot Counties and those won by Joe Biden (D) as Boomerang Pivot Counties. Nationwide, there were 181 Retained Pivot Counties and 25 Boomerang Pivot Counties. Texas had one Retained Pivot County, 0.55 percent of all Retained Pivot Counties.

More Texas coverage on Ballotpedia

• Elections in Texas
• United States congressional delegations from Texas
• Public policy in Texas
• Endorsers in Texas
• Texas fact checks
• More...

See also

Suggest a link

• Texas 2015 ballot measures
• 2015 ballot measures
• Texas Legislature

Recent news

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Texas Private Road Work Amendment. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

Texas Population Requirement for Private Road Work Amendment, Proposition 5 (2015) - Google News

External links

• Senate Joint Resolution 17
• Texas Secretary of State - What's On the Ballot 2015
• Texas Legislative Council 2015 Analyses of Proposed Constitutional Amendments
• Texas House of Representatives House Research Organization Focus Report - Amendments Proposed for November 2015 Ballot