PROTEST FOR LAWFUL PUBLIC EDUCATION FUNDING & CURRICULUM
(Ad Valorem Property Taxes Levied by State School Districts Are Unconstitutional)
Monday October 22, 2012
All Day Starting at 9:00 AM
Sidewalks around the
see map below
Yes! This is a big event for public schools, the Texas Congress. We need to be there with the truth because they won’t. Let’s get the Rule of Law they always like to give lip service to!
TTSFC v. SBOE:
The Texas Taxpayer’s & Student Fairness Coalition, consisting of 392 Texas School Districts that manage about 70% of the student population of Texas, open their first day of trial against the State Board of Education and the Texas Education Commissioner in the 250th District Court in Travis County, Texas. The TTSFC claims that the ad valorem property tax system supporting state public education imposed by the local districts and designed by the state legislature is unconstitutional.
The TTSFC believes that the ad valorem property tax system must be altered once again to raise and distribute the tax more equally between districts. We at SueIT.org know that any ad valorem property tax in support of a state function like state highways and public schools are unconstitutional under Article 8 Section 1-e and need to be stopped immediately.
The TTSFC claims are essentially the same as those filed by many local State school districts on many occasions over a 40 year period resulting in essentially the same erroneous judicial opinions. The Texas Supreme Court Opinions have found these taxes unconstitutional but for the wrong reasons, hence, misleading the State Legislature to alter the means of calculating and setting the ad valorem property tax in a way that appears to make the tax constitutional and in compliance with the judicial opinions.
On most occasions the newly legislatively designed ad valorem property tax systems supporting state public schools are almost immediately in violation of the TSC rulings.
But the State School Districts have a vested interest in the continuance of the unconstitutional state ad valorem property tax to support state public schools in violation of Article 8 Section 1-e.
These local state school districts should not be allowed to sue the state for violation of their constitutional rights because they do not have any constitutional rights, only duties.
Note: Ron Avery is not a party to the suit in progress nor is he in a lawsuit related to property taxes. The Avery v. Murphy case shown on the left menu was disposed of by the Texas Supreme Court but the Avery case proves the statements made on this website.
1. Protest closing of the
1.1. The “Unique Injury” rule of judicial precedence does not apply to citizens who have been damaged by the actions of the State and its employees and officers in violation of the Texas Constitution.
1.2. The proper use of the “Unique Injury” rule is to block citizens from interfering with the lawful authority of an officer or employee of the state unless they have been injured in some unique way separate from all their peers. A State employee or official acting in their constitutional capacity may be sued by a citizen if they were injured by the act in a unique way.
1.3. Courts were created and lawsuits were invented by the people for the purpose of interfering with the actions of state employees and officials that have no constitutional authority for the act committed.
1.4. How can a citizen interfere with the lawful authority of a state employee or official who had no lawful authority to act as alleged, causing damage to the citizen?
1.5. It makes no difference how many citizens or if all citizens were harmed by the act of a state employee or official that had no authority to act as alleged causing the damage.
1.6. Therefore, citizens cannot be lawfully blocked from using the judicial system using the “unique injury rule” to stop unconstitutional taxation harming a few or every citizen. But the courts do it anyway! It’s a scam or Biblical proportions costing Texans Trillions of dollars over a 44 year period.
2. Protest the granting of Constitutional
Rights to State Subdivisions. The courts have allowed School Districts to
file lawsuits against the state for violations of the Texas Constitution,
namely, Article 8 Section 1-e and Article 7 Section 1. State subdivisions may
be lawfully permitted to petition a State District Court for Declaratory
Judgment requesting opinions as to how to proceed in their duties to the
2.2. SDs may ask the court if they have authority to spend revenue they collect.
2.3. SDs may ask the court if they have authority to determine how to collect and spend any revenue obtained.
2.4. But the local State School Districts cannot ask the court if their constitutional rights have been violated by the action of some other school district.
2.6. The local State School Districts only have duties to perform not rights to be protected.
Article 8 Section 1-e says:
“No State ad valorem taxes shall be levied upon any property within this State.”
Article 7 Section 1 says:
“A general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools.” (Bolding added)
Note: Some try to make a distinction between the Legislature and the State so they can give more power to the Legislature than to the State. Is the Legislature a state unto itself or a separate entity from the State? Absolutely not! The State Legislature cannot legislate or create anything that is not delegated to the State in the Constitution.
“It is the policy of this state that the provision of public education is a state responsibility and that a thorough and efficient system be provided and substantially financed through state revenue sources***” (Bolding added)
Note: “Substantially financed” does not and
cannot mean less than 50%. When architects say a building is substantially
completed they do not mean less than 50% completed. A substantially completed
building can be occupied by the tenant or owner and that cannot happen in a
building less than 50% completed. Therefore, this means that local school
districts cannot fund over 50% of the operation, maintenance and new
construction of schools, by any means, for more than 5%. Substantial Financing would be about 95%. But we will see later
that no ad valorem tax can be used to fund any part of State Public Education.
We will also see that the local
Article 8 Section 1(a) says:
“Taxation shall be equal and uniform.”
Note: This means that
all forms of State taxation to support State functions like highways and Public
Schools must be funded with a tax that is uniformly and equally applied to all
Article 7 Section 3(e) says:
“The Legislature shall be authorized to pass laws for the assessment and collection of taxes in all school districts and for the management and control of the public school or schools of such districts, whether such districts are composed of territory wholly within a county or in parts of two or more counties, and the Legislature may authorize an additional ad valorem tax to be levied and collected within all school districts for the further maintenance of public free schools, and for the erection and equipment of school buildings therein; provided that a majority of the qualified voters of the district voting at an election to be held for that purpose, shall approve the tax.” (Bolding added)
Constitutional provision immediately above is in direct contradiction to
Article 8 Section 1-e which abolishes all State ad valorem property taxes on
any property in
Further, as noted earlier, the Legislature cannot be given more power and authority than has been delegated to the State. This is why some try to make a distinction so they may get around the prohibition of ad valorem property taxes to fund state functions by claiming that the Legislature can authorize powers that have been prohibited to the State. This is total non-sense! The Legislature cannot delegate power to one of its subdivisions that the State has been specifically denied by the people.
Finally, can the voters approve or impose an ad valorem property tax to fund State functions in a way that is forbidden to the State? Certainly not!
“(3) "Governmental unit" means: (A) this state and all the several agencies of government that collectively constitute the government of this state, including other agencies bearing different designations, and all departments, bureaus, boards, commissions, offices, agencies, councils, and courts; (B) a political subdivision of this state, including any city, county, school district, junior college district, levee improvement district, drainage district, irrigation district, water improvement district, water control and improvement district, water control and preservation district, freshwater supply district, navigation district, conservation and reclamation district, soil conservation district, communication district, public health district, and river authority;” (Bolding added)
The local school district is a subdivision of the State of
How then can a State subdivision have authority that the State
does not have? How can a State Subdivision have authority under Article 7
Section 3(e) that is specifically denied to the State of
This is the question that needs to be asked of the Texas Supreme Court but the State School Districts are not going to ask such a question because they have a vested interest in getting around the Constitutional Prohibition against the use of an ad valorem property tax by the State to fund State functions like Public Education.
The Texas Supreme Court has twisted itself into a pretzel in an
attempt to make a distinction between the powers of the State and the powers of the local
The TSC has ruled on several occasions that local ad valorem
property taxes imposed by the local school districts become state ad valorem
property taxes when they become uniform across the state of
The legislature then goes into special session to come up with a gimmick to allow districts to charge a lower tax rate below the tax rate cap at differing levels to show that the ad valorem tax is not uniform and therefore a local ad valorem property tax in conformity to the unconstitutional Article 7 Section 3(e).
The TSC also ruled on several occasions that the uniformity is an indication that the local State School Districts have lost their discretion to set the tax rate themselves rather than being forced to tax at the maximum tax rate. The TSC deems the loss of discretion by the district the imposition of State control over the taxation amount resulting in what the TSC claims is a violation of Article 8 Section 1-e.
Therefore, the end result of the
It is obvious that the Texas Supreme Court has gone way out of its way to avoid the obvious that a State function like public education cannot be paid for by a means that is forbidden to the State. Further, the TSC has twisted itself into a knot in an attempt to show that a subdivision of the State can have and exercise autonomous power separate from the State, as if the State could create a more powerful entity then itself. This is hilarious and shows a complete ignorance of the ancient law of delegated authority!
It is also obvious that the Texas Judicial System has done all
this along with the Legislature and the State Public School Districts to obtain
money and debt in a manner that has been forbidden unto the State. It is also
obvious that the citizens have been blocked from exercising their
constitutional right under Article 1 Section 13 to correct their State so that
more than half of the financing for public education is done in a manner
forbidden to the state and to guarantee to 10 banks in America a risk free loan
program which has reached $106.8 Billion dollars in Texas alone. There should
be no borrowing of money at all to build new schools and conduct all public
Once the legislature creates their new tax lowering gimmick, as done by the latest Perry Sharp plan, it is not long until all school districts are back charging the maximum tax rate allowed by the cap or very near it. When this happens the TSC rules them to be an unconstitutional State ad valorem property tax rather than local ad valorem property tax. But the Supreme Court of Texas is the only entity in the State that can say when that occurs. Hence, the citizen can know the tax is unlawful but cannot refuse to pay it because it has not been declared so by the TSC to be a State ad valorem property tax in violation of Article 8 Section 1-e. And if the citizen sues to find out, they are thrown out of court because they cannot prove a unique injury separate from all his peers. This is judicial corruption at its highest!
The simple way to determine if a tax is a state tax is to
determine how the proceeds are spent. If the revenue is spent on a state
function then the tax is a state tax. Public Education is a State Function.
Therefore, revenue spent on Public Education cannot be raised by an ad valorem
property tax. This means that the autonomy and discretion of the local
We know that we avoid all the ridiculous mandates and opinions
when we find that the school districts cannot impose an ad valorem property
tax. This means that all public education must be raised in a manner in
conformity to Article 8 Section 1(a), i.e., it must be equal and uniformly
collected across the state. That does not mean a little bit equal but
absolutely equal by a sales tax. This then can be distributed exactly equally
to all students across
We do not want to make a bunch of noise or disturb the progress of the courthouse or block, impede or harass pedestrian or vehicular traffic. This will be a quiet informative demonstration. We want to have plenty of good signs that talk for us and plenty of literature and fliers to pass out to explain our frustration, exhaustion and disgust with a 44 year tax scam against the property of the people of Texas being conducted by the Texas Judiciary, the State Legislature, the Local State School Districts and a handful of filthy rich greedy banks. We want them to learn that we know what they are doing and how they’re doing it, and that we know it is criminal.