Decision 2006: Louisiana State Constitutional Amendments

AMENDMENT 1: COASTAL PROTECTION & RESTORATION FUND For: A vote "for" would change the name of the Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Fund to the Coastal Protection and Restoration Fund and would deposit into that fund all potential federal revenues from the Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities. Against: A vote "against" would retain the current name and allow potential federal revenues from Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities to be deposited in the general state treasury fund. AMENDMENT 2: CONSOLIDATION OF COASTAL FUNDS For: A vote "for" would consolidate the Louisiana Coastal Restoration Fund and its future revenue into either the Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Fund or the Coastal Protection and Restoration Fund. Against: A vote "against" would maintain a separate Louisiana Coastal Restoration Fund. AMENDMENT 3: REGIONAL FLOOD PROTECTION AUTHORITIES For: A voted "for" would authorize the legislature to establish regional flood control authorities and create two in Southeast Louisiana. Against: A vote "against" would maintain the current system of separate levee boards. AMENDMENT 4: HURRICANE PROTECTION LIABILITY For: A vote "for" would lower compensation paid by the government for private property taken for or damaged by hurricane protection projects. Buildings or structures damaged by a president-declared emergency would remain eligible for higher compensation for three years after the emergency. Against: A vote "against" would remain the current higher compensation for private property taken for or damaged by Hurricane protection projects. AMENDMENT 5: LIMITS ON EXPROPRIATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY For: A vote "for" would prohibit the taking of private property for many economic development projects. Against: A vote "against" would continue to allow private property to be taken for economic development projects. AMENDMENT 6: PROCEDURES TO TRANSFER EXPROPRIATED PROPERTY For: A vote "for" would change and provide in the constitution a method of selling and leasing some expropriated property. Against: A vote "against" would leave in statute procedures for selling and leasing expropriated property. AMENDMENT 7: MEDICAID TRUST FUND INVESTMENT For: A vote "for" would authorize the state to invest up to 35 percent of the Medicaid Trust Fund for the elderly in stocks. Against: A vote "against" would continue to prohibit the state from investing this fund in stocks. AMENDMENT 8:HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DAMAGED HOMES For: A vote "for" would allow persons unable to reoccupy homes damaged by a governor-declared emergency to retain the homestead exemption for a set period of time and provide for special assessments for eligible elderly. Against: A vote "against" would result in the loss of the homestead exemption and special assessments for eligible elderly for those unable to reoccupy their homes within one year of a governor-declared emergency. AMENDMENT 9: STATE MANDATES ON SCHOOL SPENDING For: A vote "for" would prohibit some state mandates to increase local school spending unless the state provides for a local source of revenue and the local government authorities its collection. The provision would not apply to a law approved by a two-thirds vote of the legislature. Against: A vote "against" would continue to allow the state to mandate increses in local school spending without providing a local funding source. AMENDMENT 10: HIGHER EDUCATION INVESTMENTS For: A vote "for" would allow public or private colleges and universities to invest up to 35 percent fo state-funded permanently endowed funds in stocks. Against: A vote "against" would continue to prohibit public colleges and universities from investing state funds in stocks. AMENDMENT 11: HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION FOR HOMES IN REVOCABLE TRUSTS For: A vote "for" would extend the homestead exemption to property placed in a revocable trust by a person who continues to occupy the home. Against: A vote "against" would continue to allow the homestead exemption for irrevocable trusts, but not for revocable trusts. AMENDMENT 12: VACANCY IN STATEWIDE ELECTED OFFICES For: A vote "for" would require an election if there is vacancy in the office of the Lieutenant Governor and more than a year remains in the term. It would also require a special election, if necessary to fill vacancies in statewide elective offices. Against: A vote "against" would continue to allow an appointed Leitenant Governor to serve the remainder of the full term, It would also contine to allow elections to fill vacancies for statewide elected officials only on regularly scheduled election dates. AMENDMENT 13: Judges Qualifications For: A vote "for" would require judicial candidates to have been admitted to the practice of law for 8 or 10 years, depending on the court, and reside in their districts for one year prior to qualifying for election. Against: A vote "against" would continue to require state judges to be admitted to the practice of law for five years and reside in their districts for two years prior to qualifying for election.