North Dakota
Property tax credit to cost North Dakota more than anticipated
BISMARCK, N.D. (NORTH DAKOTA MONITOR) – North Dakota can expect a key property tax relief program to cost about $430 million for the 2025-2027 budget cycle — about $20 million more than what the state planned to spend.
The 2025 legislature set aside $408.9 million for the primary residence credit for the two-year budget cycle, State Tax Commissioner Brian Kroshus said.
“That discussion was had during the last session, that I don’t think this is enough,” he told state lawmakers at a Tuesday meeting of the Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee. “We were given every assurance that if we need to ask for additional funds, they will be found.”
The credit, created in 2023, subsidizes property taxes for most homeowners. Initially it provided a $500 discount every year, but lawmakers in 2025 increased that amount to $1,600 as part of a major property tax relief package, House Bill 1176.
Kroshus said the cost of the program is outpacing the state’s initial projection for several reasons. First, the credit is becoming more well-known, and more people are persuaded to apply for $1,600 in relief compared to the original $500.
“The $1,600 credit tends to get your attention a little bit more,” he said.
More North Dakotans are also becoming homeowners as the state’s housing supply increases, he added.
The deadline for homeowners to apply for the credit this year is April 1.
House Bill 1176 also sought to provide tax relief by capping annual property tax increases by local governments to 3% annually.
The North Dakota League of Cities, the North Dakota Association of Counties and the North Dakota School Boards Association recently conducted informal surveys of their members to see how communities are responding to the cap.
The associations told lawmakers Tuesday that many members report that the new cap is making budgeting more stressful.
All three organizations found widespread confusion about how the law works, and said the statute is too rigid. They said the law isn’t flexible enough to accommodate their communities, which have varying budgeting processes, scheduling deadlines, population sizes and tax bases.
“Langdon School District, located in the northeast part of the state, was especially direct in their response, saying that the district did not feel confident that it could even determine whether it was in compliance with the 3% cap,” Amy De Kok, executive director of the North Dakota School Boards Association, said during the meeting.
Many local government officials also emphasized in the survey that the costs of basic expenses like emergency services and employee benefits — especially health insurance — are increasing more than 3% a year. They said they’re worried about how they’ll pay for those costs in the long-term under the cap.
Some counties reported being “unable to provide the adequate competitive salary increases” and that “they were limited in their ability to budget for large projects,” said Donnell Preskey, government and public relations specialist for the North Dakota Association of Counties.
Some local governments also say the law makes it harder to qualify for certain state funding opportunities, since some programs require them to tax their communities above a certain threshold to qualify.
“Township officers are being pushed in two different directions,” Larry Syverson, executive director of the North Dakota Township Officers Association, said during the meeting.
Communities suggested increasing the cap or making it proportional to inflation, the informal surveys found. Another common request was for the law to be amended to be more forgiving of administrative deadlines and to make it easier to correct paperwork mistakes, since communities are still getting used to the new system.
They also raised the possibility of allowing costs like public safety, infrastructure and election expenses to be exempt from the caps.
House Bill 1176 allows for local governments to exceed the 3% cap if voters approve it on the general election ballot.
None of the association representations said they were aware of any communities proposing cap increases to voters during the 2026 general election at this time. They said some local governments are dipping into reserves or tapping into other funding sources in order to make up for money lost due to the cap, however. Local governments also have an ability to carry over unused property tax increases from year-to-year in certain circumstances.
Several lawmakers on Tuesday questioned why communities aren’t going to voters to override the cap if it’s putting so much stress on their budgets.
Kory Peterson, former mayor of Horace, in testimony to the committee noted it’s hard for communities to get tax increases approved on the ballot.
“There’s a lot of tax fatigue,” he said. “As a former mayor, I know that it would be very, very difficult to try and bring up a tax increase in the city of Horace.”
Not all of the feedback was negative. De Kok said some school districts said the cap made the budgeting process more predictable and transparent for taxpayers, for example.
The committee expressed interest in exploring legislation to address some of the local governments’ concerns later this year. It’s scheduled to meet again in June.
“We knew after the session that there was going to be some adjustments necessary,” Rep. Don Vigesaa, R-Cooperstown, said during the meeting.
Why North Dakota?
District Game Warden Noah Raitz
I admit that when I was first thinking about getting into conservation enforcement, I was not thinking about moving to North Dakota. Not because I didn’t like the state or had a reason not to move here. It was the opposite. I lacked the knowledge of what North Dakota had to offer. I was also in high school, so I had no idea what my plan was other than going to college.
I was just talking about this with another warden and the recruitment of candidates for our game warden positions. Sure, we hire wardens born and raised in North Dakota, but that’s not a requirement for the job. As proof of that, I grew up 30 minutes from the North Dakota border but didn’t start to think of it as an option until college.
I attended the University of North Dakota and one summer I worked for the North Dakota Game and Fish Department as a fisheries seasonal in Devils Lake. I enjoyed the work, but it also showed me the fishing opportunities the state offered that I had never explored before.
I also helped with sharp-tailed grouse surveys in college, which showed me the upland hunting opportunities that, again, I had never explored.
I grew up hunting waterfowl, but not in North Dakota until college, when I was introduced to field hunting. As you can guess, this showed me the prized waterfowl hunting so many people are passionate about in North Dakota.
I say all that because North Dakota’s habitat and natural resources are worth appreciating. It might not be flashy mountains or cabin-packed lakes, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have a lot to offer. We have the prairie, badlands, the Missouri River system, and many other unique landscapes throughout the state.
What do those have in common? They are made up of large areas of undeveloped landscapes for anyone to enjoy. Or in my case, to work in. That’s my office, the habitat for our fisheries and wildlife resources. I may not have a fast-food restaurant or big shopping mall down the road, but I do have various hunting and fishing opportunities within 5 minutes of my house.
I was asked recently what the favorite part of my job is, and it wasn’t very difficult to answer. It’s the interactions I get to have with the public. Getting to listen to a young angler tell me about the big fish they caught, or a new hunter showing off their first duck. It’s also the older generation telling me about hunting or fishing stories from before I was born.
To circle back to where I started, I did not expect to end up in North Dakota, but I am sure glad I did. Enforcing game and fish regulations is easy when the majority of our interactions don’t end in a citation, but instead a hunter or anglers’ story about that day’s success or defeat.
BISMARCK — The North Dakota Attorney General’s Office is cautioning homeowners to be on the lookout for asphalt-paving scams.
Homeowners may be approached by unannounced illegitimate contractors claiming to be “working in the area” with “excess material” for purchase at a discounted price, with same-day decisions encouraged, a news release stated. Contractors may demand a large upfront payment, in which case they may simply leave town or begin working immediately, insisting on payment as soon as work is completed.
The work will be low-quality and easily identifiable as a scam, the release said. False contractors may even use intimidation or threats for quick payment before work can be inspected.
Homeowners should be cautious of anyone offering unsolicited paving work, especially if they claim to have leftover material at a discounted price.
The office provided the following tips to avoid falling victim to a scam:
- Research any contractor before hiring
- Ask detailed questions about the business
- Get all estimates and terms in writing
- Avoid making full payment up front
- Avoid using cash and mobile payment apps
“Pay attention if your intuition tells you that an offer appears too good to be true, because it likely is,” North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley said in the release.
Consumers with questions or who suspect they may have been targeted by an asphalt-paving scam should contact the Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division at (701) 328-3404.
Our newsroom occasionally reports stories under a byline of “staff.” Often, the “staff” byline is used when rewriting basic news briefs that originate from official sources, such as a city press release about a road closure, and which require little or no reporting. At times, this byline is used when a news story includes numerous authors or when the story is formed by aggregating previously reported news from various sources. If outside sources are used, it is noted within the story.
FARGO — As North Dakota voters cast their ballots for the June primary election, choosing candidates won’t be the only decision they’ll face.
Voters will also decide whether future ballot measures must be composed of just a single subject.
The Legislature placed the matter on the ballot in 2025, when it passed
Senate Concurrent Resolution 4007.
Some lawmakers argue the measure, if passed, will work in favor of voters by making future amendments more digestible and less jumbled for voter comprehension.
Senate Majority Leader David Hogue, one of the lawmakers in favor of the measure, said it would prevent any “bait and switch” tactics to pass unpopular amendments against the wishes of unassuming voters. Hogue sponsored the legislative resolution that placed the measure on the ballot.
The Seante passed the resolution with outspoken support, only one lawmaker voted no. However, the resolution faced more resistance in the House, passing in a vote of 57-36.
If passed, the resolution would require the Secretary of State’s office to verify that future amendments meet the single-subject requirement.
One outspoken voice in opposition of the resolution is House Minority Leader Zac Ista, D-Grand Forks, who said he voted against the resolution fearing it would introduce a “layer of bureaucratic review” to the ruling process. Ista also added there is not clear criteria for determining what meets the requirement.
“I think in North Dakota, if we entrust the secretary of state and attorney general of being the sole arbiters of what is and is not a single subject, that’s really going to handcuff voter initiatives in the state,” Ista said.
Contrary to this, Hogue feels the resolution would not require any complex review to determine whether or not future amendments meet the single rule requirement.
“I don’t think it’s a legal judgment. I think if you’re trying to pass two different measures in one, that’s a common-sense judgment.” Hogue said.
Measure 1 is the first of four constitutional amendments on the North Dakota ballot for this upcoming election cycle, three of which won’t be voted on until this November.
Early voting in some counties begins Tuesday, June 2. Election Day is Tuesday, June 9.
How Measure 1 will appear on the ballot
“This constitutional measure would amend and reenact section 9 of article III and section 16 of article IV of the Constitution of North Dakota, relating to requiring each resolution adopted by the legislative assembly proposing a constitutional amendment and each initiative petition and measure proposing a constitutional amendment be comprised of a single subject. The proposed amendment is summarized as follows: constitutional amendments would be limited to one subject. The Secretary of State shall not approve an initiative petition for circulation if the Secretary determines that the proposed amendment comprises more than one subject. Additionally, the legislative assembly is required to limit proposed amendments to the constitution to one subject.
“The estimated fiscal impact of this measure is none.”
Text via the North Dakota Secretary of State’s office.
Brennan Collins is a reporting intern who started at The Forum in May 2026.
-
Rhode Island43 seconds agoFlight restrictions over World Cup sites: Unpermitted drones could be destroyed if they fly in certain areas – The Boston Globe
-
South Dakota9 minutes agoAgronomist: eastern South Dakota crops hit and miss – Brownfield Ag News
-
Tennessee16 minutes agoWashington County, Tennessee Isaiah 117 House hosts fundraiser
-
Texas19 minutes agoBrazoria County deputy shoots, kills Texas State University student after car chase, report says
-
Utah24 minutes agoNew temporary venue emerges from rubble of old downtown Salt Lake theater
-
Vermont31 minutes agoLong Trail Brewing unveils 168-beer pack for National Trails Day
-
Virginia34 minutes agoFirst boat to Bermuda wins — Virginia man prepares for 753-mile voyage from Annapolis – WTOP News
-
Washington39 minutes agoLebanon hopes crunch talks in Washington will halt an Israeli invasion
