Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Senior Relief topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sen. Mike Wabamow urges higher thresholds in bill to reduce property taxes for seniors
Summary
Senate Bill 2301 would raise income and taxable-value thresholds tied to the federal poverty level so more homeowners aged 65+ would qualify for a property-tax reduction; committee heard sponsor, fiscal clarifications and neutral testimony and took no action.
Senator Mike Wabamow introduced Senate Bill 2301 to the Senate Finance and Taxation Committee, saying the measure raises income and taxable-value thresholds so more homeowners 65 and older would avoid property tax burdens. “People who are over 65 shouldn't have to pay property tax. They have contributed enough and they should be able to really own their own homes,” Wabamow told the committee.
The bill ties eligibility to a percentage of the federal poverty level and raises the taxable-value cap used to determine a reduction. Wabamow said he increased the home-value threshold to protect owners of modest homes who face higher valuations and related tax bills. He told members he calibrated the measure “to allow for increases in the cost of living, thereby striving to keep purchasing power roughly the same over time.”
Why it matters: sponsors and members said rising assessed values have priced some long-time homeowners out of their communities, and lawmakers are considering multiple bills to address property-tax pressure on seniors. Committee members repeatedly noted the measure overlaps with other proposals, including recent changes to the homestead/primary-residence credits.
Committee discussion focused on thresholds and fiscal effects. Members asked how the bill's maximum taxable-valuation reduction (listed in bill language as $13,500) maps to true-and-full market value; Wabamow said he asked legislative staff to use a home value in the $350,000–$400,000 range when modeling the provision. Wabamow also acknowledged his two-tier income approach (different cutoffs for single and two-person households) may risk leaving some who lose a spouse with a lower threshold than they previously had.
State fiscal staff testified in neutral that the fiscal-note wording contains a discrepancy but that the calculations behind the fiscal estimate were made on the higher taxable-valuation figure. “The fiscal note will not change,” a state official told the committee while confirming the clerical difference between the bill text ($13,500) and the printed line in the fiscal-note cover ($9,000).
Committee members said they want to collect and compare all pending property-tax relief proposals before choosing a path forward. Chairman Weber and other members said no committee action would be taken at the hearing and that SB 2301 would be added to the committee’s list for further consideration.
The hearing closed with no vote taken and no amendments adopted; the committee agreed to consider SB 2301 alongside other property-tax bills.
