The state legislature is taking final votes Wednesday to put several constitutional amendments restricting tax rates on November's ballot. They passed the House thanks to support from two Charlotte legislators who recently left the Democratic Party.
One of the amendments would ask voters if they want new limits on local property tax increases. Legislators wouldn't decide on the details until after the election; the ballot question simply asks voters if they are for or against a "constitutional amendment requiring limits on property tax increases by local governments."
Rep. Brian Echevarria, R-Cabarrus and the bill's sponsor, says property tax bills are out of control thanks to revaluations and rate increases by counties and municipalities.
"No one gets priced out of the home they own, they get taxed out of the home they own," he said. "So when high property taxes cause hardship and pressure people out of their homes, it is the government's fault."
But Democrats argued that much of the upward pressure on property taxes comes from needs that previously were funded by state government, noting that lawmakers haven't passed a comprehensive budget bill since 2023.
"Many of our counties and towns are paying for essential services that are supposed to be paid for by the state, that are supposed to be paid for by this body, and we know that these counties and towns primarily rely on property taxes to fund these essential services," said Rep. Brandon Lofton, D-Mecklenburg.
And House Democratic Leader Robert Reives, D-Chatham, pointed out that the proposed amendment doesn't give the legislature any power it doesn't already have. He called on colleagues to instead develop legislation this session to address concerns about property taxes. One such bill, the elimination of a property tax loophole used by apartment developers, passed the House unanimously on Wednesday.
The proposed amendment got the necessary three-fifths majority in the House on Wednesday because two former Democrats — Reps. Carla Cunningham and Nasif Majeed of Charlotte — joined Republicans in a 73-46 vote. Both recently changed their registration to unaffiliated after losing their Democratic primary elections.
The Senate is expected to vote later Wednesday, completing the amendment's legislative process because the governor can't sign or veto proposed amendments.
Income tax cap approved
Another amendment would cap the state's personal income tax rate at 3.5%. Currently the constitutional cap is 7% (approved in a 2018 referendum), but the cap wouldn't lower taxes — just prevent future legislators from increasing it.
Under a budget agreement announced last week to address scheduled income tax cuts, legislative leaders now want to drop the personal income tax rate from 3.99% to 3.49% from 2027 to 2029, then 3.24% from 2030 to 2032, eventually reaching 2.99% for 2033 and 2034 and 2.49% when revenue triggers are reached after that point. The corporate income tax is in the process of being phased out entirely.
"This amendment will ensure the people's elected representatives take the taxpayers' money and spend the taxpayers' money in a way that taxpayers want — in a controlled, measured way," said Rep. Dean Arp, R-Union. "Let the people decide what to do with their money."
But Democrats warned that while the tax cap amendment might seem popular to voters, it could have long-term consequences for the state's ability to fund basic services.
"This is a dangerous amendment to put on a ballot without fully explaining the consequences to voters," said Rep. Marcia Morey, D-Durham. "It sounds great, it sounds too good to be true, but the consequences are irreparable. ... Don't tie the hands of future legislators to a 3.5% income tax that will ultimately harm our state and its people."
The tax cap amendment passed the Senate on Tuesday along party lines, and the House had a similar vote on Wednesday with Cunningham and Majeed helping Republicans get above the 72-vote threshold.
Other amendments could join a crowded ballot too
The House has also approved an amendment on filling vacant Council of State offices. It would require the governor to appoint someone who's recommended by the political party that holds the office.
"Whenever there is a vacancy — let's say a resignation, or somebody passes away on the Council of State — the governor gets to pick whoever he wants to serve in that role," said Rep. Kyle Hall, R-Stokes and sponsor of the proposal. "I feel that the voters not only elect a person, but they also elected a political party to serve in that role, and I believe that the political party should have a say in who the governor picks."
The governor would get a list of three names from the political party's leadership, and the appointment would have to come from that list.
Democrats were also united in voting against that proposed amendment. Rep. Tim Longest, D-Wake, called on lawmakers to "recognize that the governor, rather than the elites and the party bosses of political parties, are best situated to determine who would suitably fill out a Council of State role."
That amendment hasn't yet been scheduled in the Senate, but Senate leader Phil Berger has voiced support for the concept.
Meanwhile, the Senate is scheduled to vote Wednesday on an amendment to put the state's restrictions on labor unions into the constitution.
Other constitutional amendments moving in the legislature this week include:
'Right to farm': This amendment would reiterate that the legislature is the only entity that can regulate (or delegate regulatory authority) agricultural and timber activities. It's awaiting a hearing in the Senate Rules Committee.
State Board of Education elections: A House proposal would amend the constitution to elect members of the State Board of Education. Most of those board members are currently appointed by the governor. The superintendent of public instruction would chair the board if the amendment is approved by voters. The amendment bill is awaiting a hearing in the House Rules Committee.
