10
Loading video...
By Giulia Carbonaro
Senior Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Voters in ten states weighed property tax relief and housing measures aimed at spurring construction and improving affordability on November 3, with most passing by overwhelming margins, according to the latest results.
Housing affordability, which has recently been eroded by rising home prices, historically elevated borrowing costs, higher property taxes, and soaring homeowner insurance premiums, has emerged as a rare bipartisan issue this year, with the midterms confirming how eager Americans are for reform.
With Democrats now in control of Congress after a series of stunning victories around the country, housing experts believe the party will be more generous than Republicans in spending money for housing programs whose funding was set to expire in December. But the federal government’s power to boost housing supply, which experts have long identified as the root cause of the current affordability crisis, is limited.
Read More on News
A lot more power is in the hands of the states—and in some, residents can expect some change soon thanks to the ballot initiatives they voted on Tuesday.
Residents may not feel the benefits of these measures immediately, and their impact is likely to unfold gradually. Still, they represent progress after years of limited action as housing affordability challenges intensified across the country.
Where Voters Decided on Housing Reform
California: Proposition 1, Proposition 37, Proposition 45
With 58 percent of the votes counted, according to the New York Times latest update, only two out of three housing measures on the ballot in California—Proposition 1, Proposition 37, Proposition 45—seem set to pass.
Proposition 1, also known as the Veteran and Housing Assistance Programs Bond Measure, authorizes the state to issue $11.25 billion in bonds to fund income-qualified housing programs, including $1.25 billion for the state’s veteran home loan program. As of Wednesday morning, 59.4 percent of voters backed the measure, while 40.6 percent had voted against it.
Proposition 37, a citizen-initiated measure, authorizes the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) to issue up to $25 billion in revenue bonds to fund a new down-payment assistance program offering fixed-rate mortgages to middle-income homebuyers who provide a down payment of at least 3 percent on qualifying new homes.
With 58 percent of the votes counted, the measure was passing 61.0 percent to 39.0 percent.
...
Proposition 45, also known as the Expedited Environmental Review Process for Certain Projects Initiative, establishes deadlines for agencies to review applications and make permitting decisions; shorten or limit public agencies’ existing requirement to consider a range of project alternatives to reduce environmental impacts; and change the court review process for project approvals, limiting the occasions in which courts can delay or overturn them.
As of Wednesday morning, with 57 percent of the total votes counted, 54.1 percent of votes counted were against the passing of the measure, while 45.9 percent were in favor.
According to Chen Zhao, head of economics research at Redfin, Proposition 45 “would likely have the most direct impact on homebuilding” of the three initiatives.
“It would set deadlines for agencies to review applications, shorten parts of the environmental review process, and limit the circumstances in which courts can delay or overturn project approvals,” she previously told Newsweek. “Any time or uncertainty we can remove from that process can help lower costs for builders, so more projects could pencil out.”
Proposition 1 would mainly add affordable rental units, Zhao said, whereas Proposition 37 is a down payment assistance program for new construction. The two initiatives, which seem bound to pass, “could be helpful to homebuyers as well," but "would not do as much to address the housing shortage and high home prices we see in California today,” Joel Berner, senior economist at Realtor.com, previously told Newsweek.
“Subsidizing home purchases could actually drive home prices up, while enabling additions to the supply of new homes would bring them down," Berner added.
Hawaii: Question 2
In Hawaii, voters were asked to decide on Question 2, a constitutional amendment authorizing the state legislature to empower the counties and municipalities of the state to issue housing infrastructure growth bonds for specified public works, public improvements, and community development.
With 77 percent of the votes counted on Wednesday morning, the measure was passing 63.2 percent to 28.8 percent.
Thanks to the measure, the state “would let counties issue bonds for the roads, water, sewer and drainage that have to be in place before housing can go up, with the bonds repaid from the growth in property tax revenue the new development generates rather than from higher tax rates. Hawaii is one of the only states that doesn’t already have this tool,” Zhao said.
But the constitutional amendment does not address one of the biggest problems in the state, which is building too few homes compared to demand, especially when it comes to affordable ones: zoning.
“Local zoning regulation makes home construction even more difficult in these areas, so there is room for policy-level improvement. The ballot measure does not address zoning problems, but Hawaii’s proposition to allow counties to fund infrastructure development more easily could help to set the stage for more homebuilding,” Berner said.
Massachusetts: Question 7
Massachusetts’ Question 7, also known as the Limit on Required Lot Size for Single-Family Homes Initiative, requires cities and towns to allow single-family homes to be built in residentially zoned areas if the land is at least 5,000 square feet in area, has at least 50 feet of land bordering the street it faces and has access to public sewer and water services.
With 80 percent of the votes counted on Wednesday morning, the measure was narrowly passing 50.02 percent to 49.98 percent. The result may change throughout the day.
Should it fail, the state would do without an initiative trying to address one of Massachusetts’ biggest housing issues—large minimum lot requirements making homes more expensive and scarce.
Jesse Kanson-Benanav, executive director of Abundant Housing Massachusetts, previously told Newsweek that “the average lot in Massachusetts is half an acre, with some communities requiring 1 or 2 or more acres to build a single family home. In small states such as Massachusetts, land is limited and expensive: large lot sizes increase the cost of building new homes, and builders recoup those costs by increasing the size of new homes.”
This has resulted “in the proliferation of luxury, McMansion homes across our state which exacerbates the housing shortage and makes homeownership inaccessible for so many of our neighbors,” he added.
Experts agree that the measure could largely improve affordability in the state, though gradually, adding smaller, cheaper homes to the market over time. But the initiative challenged so-called NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) attitudes in residential neighborhoods of Massachusetts—and voters’ answer might not be what affordable housing advocates might have wished for.
Rhode Island: Question 2
With over 95 percent of the votes counted, Rhode Island voters are backing the passing of Question 2 61.1 percent to 38.9 percent. The measure authorizes $120 million in bonds to fund the increase and preservation of affordable housing.
Of these, $25 million would be dedicated to increasing the production of housing intended for homeownership, while up to $10 million would be allocated for a public housing development program. The legislature-backed measure was included in the state’s fiscal year 2027 appropriations bill, which was supported by Democrats but opposed by Republicans.
According to Berner, the measure could add some affordable units to the state’s market. “Infrastructure and financing costs are often what keep projects from moving forward, so addressing them is a step in the right direction, but these are not quick fixes,” Zhao previously told Newsweek.
Where Voters Decided on Property Tax Relief
Florida: Amendment 3
In Florida, a controversial constitutional amendment which experts and local governments warned would leave key public services underfunded reached enough votes to pass. Amendment 3, which will increase the nonschool homestead tax exemption from $50,000 to $150,000 in 2027 and up to $250,000 by 2028, received 62 percent of voters’ support, surpassing the mandated 60 percent, while 38 percent voted against it.
The amendment will also limit local spending to “core services,” such as public safety, public education, infrastructure and natural resource management. It will take effect as of January 1, 2027.
While the Florida Republican Party and exiting Governor Ron DeSantis, who spearheaded the initiative, celebrated the win on Tuesday night, experts continued warning that the measure, despite its promises of drastic tax property cuts, will backfire on Floridians.
“It’s clear that Floridians are looking for relief amid the state’s affordability crisis; unfortunately, Amendment 3 represents nothing more than a tax shift,” Florida Policy Institute (FPI) CEO Sadaf Knight said in a statement shared with Newsweek on Tuesday night.
“Communities are now facing the loss of $12 billion in local revenue on a recurring basis. As municipalities across Florida prepare to make tough choices about how to balance budgets amid a drastic reduction in revenue, it’s crucial that local governments put people first, raise revenue in the least regressive way possible, and protect against draconian cuts to critical services.”
In the months leading to the vote, both law enforcement and firefighters in the state have warned of the disastrous impact that a major loss in revenue for local governments could have on their budget and their work.
Louisiana: Amendment 1, 6, 9, 10
Three out of four property tax relief initiatives on the ballot in Louisiana were approved by voters, while one failed to pass.
Amendment 1, which would allow the surviving spouse of a disabled veteran to transfer the homestead property tax exemption one time to a new homestead, passed with 75 percent of the vote. According to the Louisiana Illuminator, it is expected to affect a little more than two hundred people.
Amendment 6, which authorizes a property tax exemption up to $30,000 of assessed property value, increasing with homeowner’s age, from taxation for homeowners 65 and older who already qualify for the income-based assessment freeze, passed with 64 percent of the vote.
Voters also passed Amendment 9, which raises the income threshold for people who qualify for a property tax freeze from $100,000 to $150,000. Among those impacted are homeowners aged 65 and above, disabled veterans, other residents who are totally and permanently disabled, and the spouses of military members killed or missing in action.
Amendment 10 was the only property tax relief initiative which failed by 53 percent of the vote. The measure would have required the legislature to create an optional property tax exemption for blighted or derelict property that has been rehabilitated, with the legislature establishing the terms of the exemption.
...
North Carolina: North Carolina Property Tax Levy Limit Amendment
In North Carolina, a measure amending the state constitution to require the legislature to pass laws limiting the amount that property taxes may increase, known as the North Carolina Property Tax Levy Limit Amendment, passed 60 percent to 40 percent.
The measure is set to apply to counties, cities, towns, special districts, and other local government units authorized to levy property taxes, giving legislators the authority to allow for potential exceptions. The levy limit is likely to be set in 2027.
Oklahoma: Oklahoma State Question 847
In Oklahoma, an initiative seeking to reduce the constitutional limits on annual increases in the fair cash value of property used to determine property tax liability was rejected by voters. The measure would have introduced a 1.75 percent cap on yearly growth in the taxable assessed value of a homestead or agricultural property.
Opponents warned that the measure would have shrunk budgets for school districts and other public services, with the Oklahoma Tax Commission estimating local tax jurisdictions would have lost $45.78 million in expected property tax revenue over the first year.
Tennessee: Amendment 2
With over 95 percent of the votes counted, Tennessee’s Constitutional Amendment 2, which would prohibit the legislature from imposing a property tax, is set to pass. As of Wednesday morning, the measure had received the support of 66.7 percent of the voters, while 33.3 percent rejected it.
The measure will not have an immediate impact on Tennessee residents, as the state currently does not levy a statewide property tax. But it would prevent the state from ever adopting one.
Analysts at the Tax Foundation had warned against passing the measure. “While property taxes are unlikely to become a major state tax revenue stream again in the future, it’s worth keeping in mind that taking them off the table altogether could limit the state’s future tax reform options,” they wrote.
“Economic studies have shown property taxes to be the least economically harmful of the major sources of state and local tax revenue, followed by sales taxes, while corporate and individual income taxes are among the most economically harmful.”
Wyoming: Initiative 1
In Wyoming, a measure establishing a property tax exemption for a homeowner’s primary residence equal to 50 percent of the property’s value, had received 55 percent of the 82 percent of votes counted as of Wednesday morning, while 41.9 percent had cast their ballot against it.
The measure is set to increase the current homestead property tax exemption, equal to 25 percent of the first $1 million in fair market value for owner-occupied single-family residences, to 50 percent with no cap on value, while eligibility requirements would be reduced to six months of annual occupancy.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines