Here's what you need to know about the State Questions on Oklahoma's 2024 ballot

Two weeks ago, I published Here's what you need to know about the judges on the 2024 ballot. In this post, I'll focus in on the two state questions that are on the ballot. 

I got some of my information from these helpful articles (SQ 833, SQ 834) at Ballotpedia, in addition to information from various blogs and news stations.

STATE QUESTION 833

State Question 833 is on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment, put to a vote of the people by the State Legislature. The resolution to do so passed the Senate by a vote of 38 to 7, with each of the 'nay' votes coming from the most conservative senators. It passed the House by a vote of 66 to 27, with the nays being a mix of Democrats and much of the conservative wing of the Republicans.

This is a complex amendment, and I'll be honest - the more complicated a constitutional amendment, the more scrutiny it deserves. Amending the Constitution likes this runs risks, as any future needed adjustments to the law could be difficult to make without another constitutional amendment. This is an important factor to consider regarding constitutional amendments.

Voting "yes" would allow for municipalities to create of 'public infrastructure districts' (PIDs), a mechanism to - this is my understanding - allow developers to put property in special tax situation where additional property tax can be levied (up to $100 per $100,000 of property value) to pay for "public infrastructure" through bonds. Public infrastructure could include things like roads in the development, sidewalks, utility lines.. or amenities like pools, parks, clubhouses. The thought is that using this mechanism would lower the cost of the buildings in the development because the infrastructure items would be funded long-term via the additional property tax.

To form this public infrastructure district (PID), 100% of surface property owners in the proposed district would have to file a petition to form the PID with the municipality. The most likely application of this would be single-owner developments.

Supporters claim this to be a solution to the creation of more affordable housing in growing cities and towns across the state. 

A "no" vote opposes the constitutional amendment. Opponents say that this looks like a special deal for bond attorneys and underwriters, and point to the higher property taxes on properties within the proposed districts are problematic for future sellers and owners. One legislator, State Rep. Andy Fugate (D-Del City), said "It gives, essentially, a homeowners association the taxation power of government."

I will be voting 'NO' on State Question 833, a position also taken by conservative Tulsa blogger Michael Bates and former State Rep. Jason Murphey (one of the most conservative legislators of the last two decades).

I highly recommend reading this post by Bates and this one by Murphey for more in-depth coverage of this state question. Spencer Humphrey with KFOR has a good synopsis article here, as well.

STATE QUESTION 834

State Question 834 is on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment, put to a vote of the people by the State Legislature. The resolution to do so passed the Senate by a vote of 37 to 7, with only Democrats voting 'nay' (a unanimous vote for their caucus, except one member was absent during the vote). It passed the House by a vote of 71 to 11, again with only Democrats voting 'nay' (19 members, a mix of both parties, missed the vote).

This is a simple and straight-forward state question. From Ballotpedia:

The measure would amend Section 1 of Article III of the state constitution. The following struck-through text would be deleted and underlined text would be added:

Section 1. Qualifications of electors.

Subject to such exceptions as the Legislature may prescribe, all only citizens of the United States, who are over the age of eighteen (18) years, and who are bona fide residents of this state, are qualified electors of this state.

A simple change, but one that clearly rules out towns and cities allowing noncitizens to vote in municipal elections, which is - believe it or not - a growing trend among some liberal localities across the country. San Francisco allows noncitizens to vote in school board races. Washington, D.C., allows noncitizens to vote in city elections (a similar measure in New York City was struck down by courts this year). 11 municipalities in Maryland and 3 in Vermont do as well.

 

This is a worthwhile, simple amendment to avoid problems with our election process down the road.

I will be voting 'YES' on State Question 834, the same as Michael Bates and the Oklahoma Legislature's Freedom Caucus.

Again, as a quick recap along with my personal voting recommendation:

• State Question 833 - Public Infrastructure Districts (No)
• State Question 834 - Citizen-only voting (Yes)

I hope this information has been helpful to you. Pass it along to any voter you know that is in need of this material before they cast their ballot! 

If you are in need of information about judicial retention voting, check out my article Here's what you need to know about the judges on the 2024 ballot.

          ~          ~          ~          ~          ~          ~          ~          ~          

You can help support the work here at MuskogeePolitico.com by indulging this quick pitch. While you're here, let me quickly introduce you to Upside, an easy way to save on fuel. 

Upside is a mobile app that gets you cash back on fuel purchases, which you can redeem for gift cards, or deposit to your PayPal or bank account. Gift cards include retailers such as Amazon, Walmart, Apple, Google Play, Lowe's, Target, Starbucks, Chili's, and more. Participating gas stations are listed with a cents-off amount. 

Below is a screenshot on some areas here in Oklahoma, showing retailers that participate with Upside (prices were valid on the morning of October 15th). And yes, some of those stations are offering in excess of 12¢ back per gallon (I've gotten as much as 25¢/gal before):

(Click to view larger)

In my experience, all Casey's and E-Z Mart stations in Oklahoma participate, along with quite a few Valero, Shell, and Sinclair stations. On road trips through states like Kansas and Tennessee, BP and Shell seem to be pretty common. In the past year or two, restaurants and convenience stores have been added (including national chains like Domino's Pizza, Taco Bueno), though these are more sporadic and urban focused. There are a total of 593 locations in Oklahoma that you can use Upside at, and over 50,000 nationwide.

I've used Upside for five years, and saved over $670 on fuel thus far. Use my promo code by signing up at this link. Your first use will get an additional 15¢ off per gallon! 

You can view a few other money-saving apps I use, along with promo codes to get you jumpstarted, at this page. 

Thanks for humoring me and reading to the very end! I hope all of the information in this post is helpful to you.