NC constitutional amendment to limit property tax hikes will be on 2026 ballots
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- House passed legislation proposing a constitutional amendment for voters.
- Measure passed 73-46, reaching the three-fifths threshold required for amendments.
- If the Senate passes it, the amendment would appear on November election ballots.
Months in the making and part of a post-stalemate budget deal between Republicans, the North Carolina General Assembly passed legislation Wednesday that would allow voters to decide if lawmakers should cap local property tax increases.
The measure passed the House 73-46, which is the required three-fifths majority for a chamber to pass a constitutional amendment.
Two former Democrats turned unaffiliated representatives — Reps. Nasif Majeed and Carla Cunningham, both of Mecklenburg County — voted with all Republicans in favor.
A few hours later, the Senate also passed the bill. That means a constitutional amendment will be on November election ballots that asks voters if they want to require the General Assembly to instill a property tax levy limit on local governments.
In the Senate, it passed 31-15, with Sen. Dan Blue, a Raleigh Democrat, joining Republicans on the mostly party-line vote.
Constitutional amendments do not need action from the governor to move ahead. Republicans control both chambers, but do not have total control in the House, as they do in the Senate.
Local governments would be impacted
However, there is not a set amount to the levy limit — that would be decided in the 2027 legislative session if voters pass the measure.
Rep. Brian Echevarria said the amendment is “about protecting our people from sharp property tax increases,” likening it to protecting chickens from foxes.
“The foxes, no matter how beautiful they are, were the reason the chickens needed to be protected in the first place,” he said.
Echevarria, a Cabarrus County Republican and vice chair of the House’s property tax reform committee, said that many other states already have levy limits in place to act as guardrails.
“Levy limits work, the sky did not fall, services were not cut, and their residents have protection from unaffordable and unsustainable property tax hikes,” he said.
But Rep. B. Ray Jeffers, a Person County Democrat, urged lawmakers to vote no and questioned why state legislators know better than local elected officials. Jeffers previously served as a county commissioner and president of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners.
“If the state wants control over revenue authority, then the state must also be willing to help fund the services it requires counties to provide, because responsibilities do not disappear,” Jeffers said.
The constitutional amendment was recommended by the House’s property tax reform committee that met from December until the legislative session began in April.
What the property tax amendment would do
Rep. Becky Carney, a longtime Mecklenburg County Democrat who served on the property tax committee, lamented the lack of real debate during floor sessions, rather than just along party lines. She said moving the amendment forward would “stifle” growth.
Carney said “we’re headed to a real bad train wreck,” and that lawmakers should always consider: “How does this affect county government?”
She said the 2027 session “is when the real hard work starts,” because lawmakers would need to decide details of the levy limit.
If House Bill 1089 is approved, the constitution would be amended to add: “The General Assembly shall enact general laws limiting the amount by which the levy of taxes on property may increase, which may include exceptions.”
Cunningham, who became unaffiliated after leaving the Democratic Party when she lost her primary, argued in favor of the constitutional amendment. She said “we don’t own their houses, that’s their houses, that’s their personal property — let them decide,” meaning voters this fall.
House Minority Leader Robert Reives noted that the General Assembly already has the power to instill levy limits and does not need to pass a constitutional amendment to gain that authority.
“This bill does nothing,” he said, as part of a list of why they shouldn’t pass it.
The amendment proposal also comes as local governments are finalizing their budgets for the coming fiscal year, with some planning to increase the property tax rate.
This story was originally published May 20, 2026 at 1:05 PM.
