Relating to the confidentiality of certain home address information in ad valorem tax appraisal records.
Upon enactment, SB617 will significantly alter the existing legal framework surrounding the handling of home address information in tax appraisal records. Specifically, it will extend confidentiality protections to a wider range of individuals, such as victims of family violence and stalking, as well as certain law enforcement personnel. Such measures respond to growing concerns about the safety of these individuals and demonstrate a legislative commitment to addressing issues related to privacy and personal security. The law is expected to create a safer environment for those in vulnerable situations by mitigating risks posed by public accessibility to personal data.
SB617 seeks to enhance the confidentiality of certain home address information included in ad valorem tax appraisal records. The primary objective of this bill is to provide increased privacy protections for individuals who may be at risk of harm, including peace officers, victims of family violence, and other individuals with compelling safety concerns. By amending Section 25.025(a) of the Tax Code, the legislation aims to ensure that those eligible for confidentiality can safeguard their personal information from public disclosure, thereby potentially preventing targeted violence or harassment.
The sentiment surrounding SB617 has generally leaned towards support, particularly among advocacy groups and lawmakers focused on the protection of vulnerable populations. Proponents of the bill argue that it is a necessary step in recognizing the unique challenges faced by victims of violence and law enforcement officers. On the contrary, there may be some concerns regarding the implications for public records transparency and the potential for misuse of the privacy provisions. Overall, the positive sentiment reflects a collective acknowledgment of the need for enhanced safety measures for at-risk individuals.
One notable point of contention revolves around the balance between public safety and personal privacy. Critics may argue that increased confidentiality could lead to concerns about accountability, particularly in the public sector where officers' addresses are protected. While the primary aim is to safeguard those at risk, this raises questions about how to ensure that such protections do not compromise public oversight or transparency. Furthermore, there is ongoing discussion about the criteria for determining who qualifies for these protections, which could be viewed as subjective and lead to a slippery slope in confidentiality.
Tax Code
Code Of Criminal Procedure
Occupations Code
Government Code
Family Code
Health And Safety Code