Supporters say the measure is a response to legislative inaction in the face of rising property tax rates, while opponents are concerned about the potential impact on infrastructure given the burden it will place on state and local governments.

The measure would prohibit governments from raising property taxes based on residents' property assessments and would require the state Legislature to fill that funding gap at 2024 levels. The Legislative Council, the Legislature's research arm, recently estimated the state would need to foot the bill at more than $1.3 billion a year, though some existing property tax relief would contribute to that amount. And local political subdivisions would have to find other ways to finance budget increases.

Rick Becker, chairman of the sponsorship committee, told reporters that supporters had submitted 40,759 signatures – thousands more than the 31,164 signatures needed to get on the November ballot. The state must now certify the signatures by Aug. 2, but would have to discard a large number of signatures for the measure to be off the ballot.

Becker, a former Republican state assemblyman from Bismarck, said the measure would allow citizens to better understand how they are taxed and condemned the existing process. He also said the state has “more than enough money” to close the gap for local governments and indicated that lawmakers also plan to introduce some bills that would reduce the annual replacement amount to around $1 billion. The Legislature estimated the measure's replacement cost for the 2025-27 biennium would be equal to about 40% of the state's general fund for the 2023-25 ​​biennium.

Becker said he was not concerned about financing the budget increases because they were “tiny revenues in relation to the overall budget.”

“We're talking about maybe 5% of their total budget, which is what they have to raise because the state covers the rest,” he said. Becker also stressed that the measure would allow local governments to experiment with the best sources of revenue, citing electricity bills and municipal operating fees as possible ways to do this.

However, many in the state are concerned about the impact of the measure, arguing that it would make local governments even more dependent on the state. Keep It Local, a coalition of more than 60 groups from various industries, was formed last week to vigorously oppose the measure. Coalition members include several chambers of commerce, public safety organizations, agricultural and energy advocacy groups, and education associations.

Chairman Chad Oban told the Tribune he was concerned that local governments would have to come to Bismarck and “sing for their dinner” to get funding without property taxes as a revenue source. Becker disputed that claim, saying the built-in allocation based on 2024 revenues eliminates the need for a discussion with the legislature about local budgets. But Oban said some options for other revenue sources do not exist in all parts of the state, which would be challenging for some governments.

“In rural communities, Becker is talking about only raising taxes by two percent,” Oban said. “They don't have a sales tax base – they don't have any way to raise that additional revenue right now.”