The Dallas Morning News isn’t a fan of TPPF’s past property tax elimination plan (no surprise), but in a recent article, the organization’s editorial board seems to take a strong stand in support of additional tax rate compression and local spending discipline (nice surprise!).

In the piece, the Board writes:

“Ending property taxes would skyrocket small business expenses and would be especially harmful to low-income Texans who can’t afford a steady escalation in their bills for basic necessities. A sales tax or consumption tax would be even more regressive than the property tax problem that it would purport to remedy.

The better solution is to keep pressure on local governments to control spending while the state buys down school taxes through growth.” [emphasis mine]

Admittedly, there is a lot about this article that is tempting to redress and refute—including that TPPF’s 2023 legislative agenda only calls for eliminating ISD M&O taxes using surplus (which appears to be the exact thing the Board insists on)—but it is better to focus on the positive aspects and on those things where we agree.

Because, indeed, there is tremendous opportunity next session.

When the 89th Texas Legislature convenes in January 2025, policymakers are expected to have a budget surplus of approximately “$20 billionafter providing for any necessary supplemental appropriations. In addition, policymakers are also expected to have $23.8 billion in their ‘savings account,’ otherwise known as the Economic Stabilization Fund, by the end of fiscal year 2025. All of which is to say that there will be ample funding with which to deliver massive property tax relief. And, much like in years’ past, TPPF believes the best way to return these monies to taxpayers is through continued tax rate compression.

But tax relief alone isn’t enough. We must also focus on tax reform. Because if this interim has proven anything, it’s that opportunistic local governments will eagerly erode any tax cut provided by the Legislature through rate hikes, tax ratification elections, bond elections, certificates of obligation, and more. Policymakers must make it harder for local government officials to chip away at tax relief—and ideally do so by limiting local spending. After all, if they can’t spend it, then they have no incentive to collect it.

If the DMN is on-board with these sorts of reforms—and it appears they are—then we, as conservatives, should welcome them with open arms, if only because the coming fight against taxpayer-funded lobbyists, special interests, and tax-and-spend local officials won’t be an easy one and there will be lots of energy dedicated to spending the surplus (savings) on things that grow government.

So to quote the always-great and indomitable John McClane, “Welcome to the party, pal!