This story was originally published by Carolina Public Press.
After North Carolina voters choose their candidates, they will see at least three more questions at the bottom of their ballot this fall. These are ballot referendums, or policy questions sent to the voters to decide.
State lawmakers are asking voters to decide whether three amendments should be made to the state Constitution—locking in policies on a more permanent basis.
On the local level, many counties, cities and towns also need voters’ permission to enter into long-term bond agreements to pay for local needs, raise local sales taxes or make other significant changes.
Photo ID Voting Referendum
First, voters will decide whether the North Carolina Constitution should require all voters—not just those appearing in person—to provide a valid photo ID to vote.
In practice, this is already a requirement for all voters under the law. But the Constitution technically only requires photo ID to vote in person, not when voting by mail.
Enshrining voter ID for everyone in the Constitution would make it hard for future lawmakers to reverse the policy.
The photo ID amendment was the most popular of the three proposed amendments, according to an August poll of a thousand North Carolinians conducted by Catawba College and YouGov. It earned 70% support.
Nearly all Republicans surveyed approved (90%), while a much smaller percentage of Democrats (57%) said the same. About 66% of unaffiliated voters supported the measure.
A 3.5% Income Tax Cap
North Carolinians pay taxes on their income each year, and that revenue goes to the state’s general fund to pay for various needs.
For years, Republican state lawmakers have worked to reduce the personal income tax rate. Since they gained a legislative majority in 2010, they’ve lowered it from 7% to 4%, with a scheduled decrease to 3.5% in 2027.
In the latest budget, lawmakers set up plans to continue lowering the personal income tax over time, potentially culminating in a 2.5% tax rate by 2040.
Despite the pre-existing schedule, Republicans are bringing the tax policy question to voters this November. One of the statewide referendums will ask voters whether they want to permanently bar state lawmakers from raising the personal income tax above 3.5% by enshrining that limit into the state Constitution.
In effect, this would make it more difficult for future legislatures that may feel differently about tax policy to enact their agenda. The only way to reverse the 3.5% income tax ceiling would be to pass another constitutional amendment, which requires three-fifths support from both chambers of the legislature and a majority of voters’ approval.
Republicans have lauded the amendment as a way to lock in their brand of fiscal conservatism even in the face of shifting political winds.
“We have seen the challenges created by past tax-and-spend policies and refuse to let our state go back to that era,” Sen. Lisa Barnes, R-Nash, one of the amendments’ sponsors, said in a press release. “This constitutional amendment provides our citizens the opportunity to have a greater say in how the tax rates are set.”
The amendment passed the legislature along party lines, with newly unaffiliated Mecklenburg County State Reps. Carla Cunningham and Nasif Majeed giving Republicans the numbers to get it across the finish line.
Down Home North Carolina and Carolina Federation are two organizations working against the two tax amendment referendums on the ballot.
“Voters deserve an opportunity when politicians make decisions that they disagree with, to vote them out and vote in people who will make different decisions,” said Jenn Frye, Carolina Federation co-director. “Locking these kinds of changes into our state Constitution takes the power away from future lawmakers to make better decisions.”
The Catawba College and YouGov poll found that about 66% supported the amendment. While registered Democrats were evenly divided on the measure, 63% of unaffiliated voters and 86% of Republican voters said they would approve of the change.
Property Tax Levy Limit
Voters will see a second tax-related amendment on their ballot dealing with property taxes, collected by county and city governments.
Property taxes are a combination of the property’s appraisal value, or how much it’s deemed to be worth by assessors, and the levy, or the rate at which the property will be taxed. Local governments calculate the amount of tax each property owner pays by multiplying their property’s appraisal value by a levy set by elected officials.
At least once every eight years, but usually more frequently, each county conducts a reappraisal to account for changing property values and tax base growth or decline. Local governments also adjust their property tax rate accordingly.
If county commissioners and city council members opt for a “revenue-neutral” standard, they aim to bring in the same amount of revenue as they did before the reappraisal. Local leaders might go above revenue neutral to pay for local needs.
Property tax revenue, alongside sales taxes, make up a majority of local government funding. They pay for core services, including police officer and firefighter salaries, public schools, infrastructure, parks, libraries and waste management.
However, some Republican lawmakers think some local governments have gone too far above revenue-neutrality without adequate justification.
So, they’ve put a constitutional amendment to voters. If voters approve the referendum, the amendment would require the legislature to enact laws limiting by how much local governments can increase property tax levies.
Some critics say the amendment is too vague. While it declares the legislature’s intent to do something to address rising property taxes, it does not specify what the levy limit would be or what exceptions would be included, if any.
Senate Minority Leader Sydney Batch, D-Wake, previously called out lawmakers for using the amendment as a tool to increase Republican turnout. House Speaker Destin Hall, R-Caldwell, sees it differently.
“I think part of that amendment is giving us clear direction and clear authority to go in and reform that process,” he told reporters in June.
Again, the vote was mostly along party lines, with Majeed, Cunningham and one Democrat, Sen. Dan Blue, D-Wake, joining Republicans.
House Minority Leader Robert Reives, D-Chatham, said state lawmakers are pushing the blame for rising property taxes onto local leaders instead of fixing the issue.
“Their choices become two things: we either cut your services or we raise your property taxes, unless the state wants to help,” he said. “And so I am in disagreement with it because it gives a false hope to people who are being buried by property taxes, because it makes them believe that if they vote for this amendment, something’s going to change.”
The North Carolina Housing Coalition analyzed how a hypothetical 2% levy limit would have impacted local governments if it had gone into effect in 2026. Lawmakers have not specified what the limit would be; it could be more or less restrictive.
The analysis showed that the state’s 100 counties would have lost $587.8 million, while 75 of the largest municipalities would have lost $362.2 million in local revenue, under the economic conditions at the time. The impact would have been concentrated in already economically distressed counties like Yancey, Graham and Hyde counties, while 27 counties would not have incurred a revenue loss that year.
In contrast, the report’s authors say the average homeowner would save $84 per year under a 2% property tax levy limit.
Down Home campaign strategist Todd Warren said the property tax levy limit would most benefit the largest property owners, corporations like Duke Energy. Down Home organizers are talking to voters across North Carolina about the amendments.
“The first thing that I start with is, do you trust Raleigh to take over your property taxes?” Warren said. “Because that’s essentially what is happening, is you’re giving away local county control for the biggest source of revenue for your county.”
He added that voters will likely face higher “hidden fees” if local governments can’t raise property taxes as a secondary way to raise revenues.
Sen. Tom McInnis, a Republican whose district includes Cumberland and Moore counties, said he’s spoken to constituents who tell him their property taxes have gone up exponentially in the past few decades. There’s a problem, he said, and it needs to be addressed.
Taking On Property Taxes
“I don’t know whether this (amendment) is the answer or not, but that’s one thing they can do to stem the tide hopefully,” he said.
Lawmakers have tossed around a number of ideas to address property tax concerns. One that became law, led by Senate Majority Leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, pauses property reappraisals for a year in certain counties to give lawmakers time to figure out longer-term solutions.
Another would clarify who qualifies for affordable housing property tax exemptions, closing a loophole used by for-profit companies to take advantage of a break intended for nonprofits. That bill unanimously passed the House but has not progressed in the Senate.
Several Democrat-sponsored bills would make changes to existing property tax exemption programs for low-income North Carolinians, the elderly and disabled veterans, in order to further more targeted relief. They have not progressed.
The Catawba College-YouGov poll found broad support for the property tax levy limit, at 79%. However, when survey respondents were provided additional context about the potential benefits and downsides of the amendment, 69% continued to support it.
There was also a partisan breakdown in support, with only 56% of Democrats approving, while 67% of unaffiliated voters and 87% of Republicans surveyed said they would vote for the amendment.
Local Referendums
This election cycle, 28 counties will have at least one additional referendum on the ballot.
Many would raise the county or city’s sales tax by a quarter or half percent. These referendums often face an uphill battle, particularly when voters are struggling financially. Bladen, Columbus, Currituck, Dare, Guilford, Hoke, Macon, McDowell, Sampson, Scotland and Yadkin counties—or one of their towns—will bring this question to voters.
In Sampson, there’s a unique sales tax referendum authorizing a half-cent sales tax hike to exclusively pay for public school operating expenses, capital projects and associated debt. According to the county, an approved increase would generate $4 million annually. Sampson County is the only county who is allowed to add a sales tax just for public education; the recently passed state budget specifically allowed it.
Several counties are asking voters to approve bonds to invest in long-term projects.
In Raleigh, the city council is asking for approval to raise property taxes for a $101.5 million housing bond and $101.5 million transportation bond, to go toward pedestrian infrastructure improvements, public transportation, low- and moderate-income housing programs and more.
In Charlotte, there are housing, neighborhood improvement and transportation bonds totalling $425 million.
In Greensboro, voters will decide whether to invest in parks and recreation, firefighting facilities, transportation, municipal buildings and housing through long-term bonds amounting to $41.5 million.
In Union County, voters will decide whether to approve a $200 million bond to build a new jail. In Brunswick, Cabarrus, Person and New Hanover counties, voters will see bonds to pay for improved or new school facilities. Currituck County voters will weigh in on whether to make education board elections partisan, while Mount Olive residents will determine whether to increase mayor and town commissioner terms from two to four years.
Voters can find sample ballots including referendums by looking up their voter registrations.
