Sponsor proposes incremental homestead exemption for seniors; supporters urge relief, opponents warn of large local revenue loss

Representative Christine Drazen on March 18 sponsored House Bill 3755, which would create an age‑ and income‑based property tax exemption for senior homeowners, and public testimony that day split between advocates who described seniors facing displacement and fiscal groups that warned of major local revenue impacts.

“The bill creates a 5% property tax exemption for senior homeowners in Oregon who are at least 65 years old, have lived in their homes for at least 10 years, and have an annual household income of no more than a hundred $50,000,” the Legislative Revenue Office said in the committee’s bill summary. Drazen, the bill sponsor, told the committee HB 3755 would start with a 5% exemption and “increases incrementally by 5% each year of eligibility up to the age of 85.”

Nut graf: Supporters said the bill would help seniors on fixed incomes remain in their homes amid rising housing and health costs; opponents — including Tax Fairness Oregon and the Oregon Education Association — said the bill would remove property tax revenue from local districts that fund police, fire, schools and other services and urged improving participation in the existing Homestead Property Tax Deferral Program instead.

Supporters: Several constituents and elected officials presented personal accounts and endorsements. Representative Greg Smith described stories of seniors forced out of long‑held homes and urged the committee to “please vote yes so everyone in my situation won't get forced out.” Dr. Mark Ricksicker, a dentist from Oregon City, testified that many elderly patients skip needed treatment because they cannot afford basic costs and called HB 3755 “nonpartisan” relief to let seniors “stay in their home…with dignity.”

Opponents and fiscal concerns: John Calhoun of Tax Fairness Oregon and Louis DeSitter of the Oregon Education Association both opposed the bill. Calhoun said reducing property tax revenue would “devastate” local governments and estimated hundreds of millions in lost local revenue if the bill passed, noting LRO figures showing roughly $1.2 billion in property tax imposed on owner‑occupied residences for those aged 65 and older. DeSitter told the committee that about one‑third of property taxes fund local schools and said cuts would affect schools statewide.

LRO and data gaps: Committee members asked the Legislative Revenue Office for an estimate of this bill’s revenue impact; LRO said it did not have a specific estimate prepared at the hearing but pointed the committee to prior informational materials and said the “big bucket for 65 and over for owner occupied residences is about 1,200,000,000.0 in property tax imposed.” The office offered to prepare bill‑specific estimates if the bill advanced.

Process and outcome: The committee opened public testimony (about 10 signed up) and heard both in‑person and remote testimony for and against. No committee vote occurred; the public hearing was closed and committee staff recorded follow‑up requests for fiscal analysis if the bill proceeds.

Ending: Proponents urged the committee to act for seniors’ housing stability; opponents urged caution and recommended pursuing improved outreach and structural changes to the existing Homestead Property Tax Deferral Program rather than an exemption that reduces local tax bases.