A concurrent resolution to amend and reenact sections 1 and 3 of article II of the Constitution of North Dakota, relating to elective franchise for an election on a question related to property tax or bonding; and to provide an effective date.
Summary
SCR 4022 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would expand voting eligibility for certain local ballot questions involving property tax or bonding. Under the measure, a person who is a qualified elector or a U.S. citizen age 18 or older who owns property in North Dakota could vote in a political subdivision election on a question related to property tax or bonding, even if that person is not otherwise a qualified elector in that subdivision. The resolution would amend sections 1 and 3 of article II of the North Dakota Constitution and, if approved by voters, would take effect on August 1, 2027.
The proposal is limited to ballot questions about property taxes and bonding and does not change eligibility for elections for public office or other statewide, local, or school district ballot measures. It would create a special voting rule for property owners in the affected political subdivision, while preserving the general rule that only qualified electors may vote in most elections.
Impact
If adopted by voters, SCR 4022 would alter the North Dakota Constitution by creating a property-owner voting exception for local elections on property tax or bonding questions. It would affect article II, sections 1 and 3, and would require implementing laws to define and administer this expanded franchise for those specific ballot questions. The change would primarily affect political subdivisions, property owners, election administrators, and local taxpayers, while leaving the broader structure of voter eligibility intact for other elections.
Sentiment
The bill did not advance: it failed on Senate second reading by a vote of 7 yeas to 40 nays. That vote indicates substantial opposition in the Senate, and the lack of committee transcript material suggests there was no recorded public committee debate available in the provided materials. Overall, the legislative sentiment appears negative, with the proposal unable to secure broad support.
Contention
The central point of contention is whether property ownership should confer voting rights on local property tax and bonding questions for people who are not otherwise qualified electors in the subdivision. Supporters likely view the measure as giving property owners a direct say in tax and debt decisions that affect them financially, while opponents likely see it as a departure from the standard one-person, one-vote principle tied to residency and qualified elector status. The measure’s narrow focus on property tax and bonding questions, rather than all local elections, is also notable because it attempts to limit the exception, but the Senate vote shows that even this limited expansion of the franchise was controversial.