Constitutional amendment to impose a limit on ad valorem taxes for real property, provide a new method of valuing real property for tax purposes, provide certain exceptions, and eliminate conflicting constitutional provisions
LR12CA is a proposed constitutional amendment that would significantly revise Nebraska’s property tax provisions. It would cap ad valorem taxes on real property at 1.5% of full cash value beginning January 1, 2027, while preserving existing exceptions for certain bonded indebtedness and school/community college facility bonds approved by voters under specified conditions. The measure also rewrites Article VIII to establish new rules for how real property is valued for tax purposes, including a framework that allows the Legislature to define valuation standards and methods, and to create separate classes of property for tax treatment.
The amendment would expand and clarify several property tax classifications and exemptions. It authorizes the Legislature to treat agricultural and horticultural land as a separate class, to tax livestock separately, and to create special treatment for motor vehicles and certain intangible property. It also includes provisions for transfer of assessed value for qualifying replacement residences for people over 55, severely disabled individuals, or victims of natural disasters, and for contaminated property that is remediated and replaced under certain conditions. The proposal would also eliminate or supersede conflicting constitutional language and preserve existing revenue laws until changed by the Legislature.
If adopted, LR12CA would alter the Nebraska Constitution and constrain how state and local governments levy property taxes on real property. It would cap the maximum ad valorem tax rate, change the constitutional valuation framework, and give the Legislature broader authority to define property classes, valuation methods, and exemptions. Counties would continue to collect property taxes, but the constitutional ceiling and new valuation rules would affect counties, cities, villages, school districts, community colleges, and other political subdivisions that rely on property tax revenue.
Based on the bill’s caption and structure, the measure appears aimed at property tax relief and tax-system restructuring, which generally suggests support from taxpayers and reform advocates. However, no committee transcript or recorded vote information was provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, endorsement, or opposition in the available materials. The bill’s eventual indefinite postponement indicates it did not advance, but the record here does not show the reasons for that outcome.
The main points of contention would likely center on the 1.5% property tax cap, because it could limit local government revenue and affect funding for schools and other local services. Another likely issue is the shift in valuation authority to the Legislature, which could be viewed as either needed flexibility or as reducing constitutional protections for uniform taxation. Special treatment for agricultural land, livestock, replacement residences, and contaminated property may also draw scrutiny from taxpayers, local governments, school officials, and property owners who could be affected differently by the new classifications and exceptions.