Senate committee hears broad property-tax relief plan; sponsors add centrally assessed taxpayers

The Senate Finance and Taxation Committee heard testimony on House Bill 1575, a property-tax relief and assessment-rate change proposed by Representative Robin Wise of District 14 that would lower taxable assessment rates for multiple classes of property and change several credits.

Representative Robin Wise told the committee the bill would reduce residential assessment rates from 9% of 50% of true and full value to 6.25% (a roughly 30% reduction in taxable-rate terms for residential property) and would reduce the assessment rate for commercial, agricultural and centrally assessed property from 10% to 8.75% (a 12.5% reduction under the sponsor’s amendment). Wise said the amendment was offered to include centrally assessed taxpayers (railroads, utilities) after legal concerns were raised and that adding them trimmed about $8 million from the bill’s fiscal note.

The measure also carries homestead-tax-credit language described by the sponsor as “identical to November” and raises the renter’s credit to $600, language the sponsor said was already part of prior proposals. Wise said the bill is intended as long-term, broad-based relief rather than a one-time payment.

Why it matters

Supporters framed HB1575 as a statewide fairness measure that spreads relief across primary homeowners, renters, farmers, small businesses and large centrally assessed taxpayers. Multiple farm and commodity groups said agriculture accounts for a large share of property tax in many rural counties and urged the legislature not to limit relief only to primary residences.

What supporters told the committee

Speakers representing agricultural organizations, county government, utilities and business groups urged approval or expressed conditional support if the sponsor’s amendment to include centrally assessed taxpayers was adopted.

- Representative Ty Dressler (District 36) said the bill “provides broad based, equitable, and consistent tax relief” and urged the committee to send the bill to the floor so multiple proposals could be reconciled in conference.

- Peril Grossman, legislative director for the North Dakota Soybean Growers Association, said farmers and ranchers in many counties shoulder most local property-tax burdens and asked lawmakers not to ignore agriculture when designing relief.

- Pete Hanover of the North Dakota Farm Bureau, Lance Gaby of the North Dakota Farmers Union, Julie Ellingson of the North Dakota Stockmen’s Association and Leslie Isnoggle of the North Dakota Corn Growers Association all testified in favor of HB1575 as amended, saying the bill spreads relief across classes and is administrable.

- Eric Spencer, president and CEO of the Greater North Dakota Chamber, called the proposal a step toward low, broadly applied tax policy.

Legal and technical issues raised

Amy McBeath of BNSF Railway told the committee that federal law and a U.S. Court of Appeals decision prohibit discriminatory tax treatment of railroads and that the amendment addressing centrally assessed taxpayers resolved the railroad’s legal concern. As McBeath said in committee, “Federal law prohibits inequitable tax treatment for railroads and there's a court decision specific to North Dakota's past attempts to do this.”

County and municipal perspective

Cass County Administrator Robert Wilson and representatives of county and city associations testified in support of relief but warned that any cap on local budgets or valuations must allow political subdivisions to meet public-safety and infrastructure needs. Wilson provided the county’s audited general-fund balance (reported for 2023 in committee testimony as $26,900,000) to correct public assertions about large county reserves and urged caution when writing caps into law.

Tax and fiscal details offered on the record

Sponsor Representative Robin Wise estimated central figures while noting some numbers were not on hand: she said centrally assessed relief under the amendment would amount to about $30,000,000; residential relief would be roughly $470,000,000; and including centrally assessed taxpayers reduced the bill’s fiscal note by about $8,000,000 (sponsor’s estimate). Wise also explained the mechanism by which the state would reimburse counties for the difference between current taxable value calculations and the bill’s lower assessment rates.

Questions and concerns from senators

Senators pressed witnesses on three recurring issues: (1) how voter-approved bond mill levies and local indebtedness interact with state buy-downs of taxable value; (2) how much of the relief would flow to out-of-state owners versus in-state taxpayers; and (3) whether relief that is broadly spread becomes too small to be meaningful.

On bonds and mill levies, Wise said the bill reduces taxable assessments but does not alter mill levies that fund specific voter-approved bonds or levies. On resident versus nonresident ownership, the sponsor provided rough estimates discussed in committee—about 76% of total taxes attributable to primary residents and roughly 83–84% of agricultural valuation in-state—while noting the committee lacked complete, county-level verification at the hearing.

No final committee action recorded

The transcript records an extended hearing with comprehensive public and organizational testimony, but the committee did not take a final recorded vote on HB1575 during this hearing segment.

Ending

Supporters from agribusiness, county government, utilities, chambers of commerce, and rural cities told the committee HB1575 offers an administrable approach to tax relief that preserves “skin in the game” across property classes. Witnesses repeatedly urged lawmakers to weigh fairness, sustainability and infrastructure funding when reconciling HB1575 with other relief and cap proposals.