Avery's Comments on Answers of Defendants Tavie Murphy and the Guadalupe County Tax Office:

1. The Seguin Independent School District has not answered Plaintiff's claims in his Petition. The following only addresses Tavie Murphy and the Guadalupe Co. Tax Office answer.
2. Chapters 41 and 42 of the Texas Property Tax Code (TPTC) do not provide "exclusive remedies" for charges for which a County Appraisal District is not responsible.
3. Chapters 41 and 42 of the TPTC only provide for exclusive remedies for "tax payers" who have a complaint about how their lawful taxes were calculated. Plaintiff's complaint only draws examples of how all means of calculating ad valorem property tax fail to meet the mandates of the Supreme Court of Texas in their latest ruling as of 11/22/05.
4. Chapters 41 and 42 of the TPTC do not provide a remedy for a citizen of Texas who claims that all ad valorem property tax on the land and possessions of all citizens is unlawful. This is not a matter that an appraisal district handles nor that the TPTC provisions provide for.
5. Chapters 41 and 42 of the TPTC is an administrative procedure to cure questions and controversies over evaluations of property and the means thereof. If the tax payer is not satisfied with the results of this administrative process he may then take it to District Court.
6. The purpose of the adminstrative process is to solve most questions of evaluation and assessment in the local districts not in State Courts.
7. But where the TPTC does not specifically mention a particular right or remedy a citizen seeks in the process the code describes then a citizen cannot be made to conform to an administrative process that on its face does not provide a remedy he seeks.
8. The Defendants' proposition is as absurd as saying that the Plaintiff should file his constitutional question concerning ad valorem property taxes with the local United Way before bringing it to the State District Court.
9. Chapters 41 and 42 do not provide for any means to "remedy" or address the constitutionality of all ad valorem taxation by State and local government.
10. Therefore, the Plaintiff's only remedy to the violation of his constitutional rights under Article 7 Section 1 and Article 8 Section 1e1 and the fundamental Principles of Property that are precedent to all Constitutions and lawful governments is an Initial and Direct filing of an Original Petition in the District State Court.
11. However, Plaintiff did in fact bring one claim that has to do with the actions or failure to act of the local County Appraisal District. This particular claim must be stricken from the Plaintiff's Petition according to the TPTC, as remedy was for this was provided for in the TPTC but was not followed properly by Plaintiff. However that does not defeat all the other constitutional claims brought by Plaintiff.
12. Sovereign and governmental immunity is not available to Tavie Murphy and the GCTO in this case because the Supreme Court of Texas has already stated in their ruling of 11/22/05 that "individuals" have a right to bring suit against government "to avoid an ad valorem property tax." In fact the Supreme Court of Texas granted to the School Districts the same rights as those of an individual to bring a suit for violation of constitutional rights affored only to citizens. Therefore, if a citizen cannot bring a suit against government for the violation of their constitutional rights how can a fiction, with no life at all, such as school district bring a suit against the state for violation of its constitutional rights?
13. Is this the law, that the Supreme Court of Texas can grant life, liberty and possessions to fictions and deny life, liberty, property and constitutional rights to the people of Texas?