The first graph shows the number of single family and multi-family units started with the intent to rent. This data is quarterly and Not Seasonally Adjusted (NSA). Although the majority of units built-for-rent’ are still multi-family (blue), there has been a significant pickup in single family units started built-for-rent (red).
In 2020, there were 44,000 single family units started with the intent to rent. In 2023, that number almost doubled to 77,000 units. There were 23,000 single family units started in Q2 2024 built-for-rent, up from 21,000 in Q2 2023.
For multi-family, there were 83,000 units started to rent in Q2 2024, down almost 40% from 136,000 in Q2 2023.
A total of 106,000 units were started built-for-rent in Q2, with 19% single family units.
The presidential election will be at the top of the ballot on Tuesday — but in a number of states, voters will also have the chance to weigh in on important ballot measures impacting homeowners.
Nearly a dozen states will have statewide ballot questions on issues impacting homeowners, most of them related to property taxes. Many additional local questions on property taxes will appear on ballots at the county or city level.
At the state level, North Dakota’s proposal to eliminate property taxes entirely is the most radical homeowner-related proposal up for a vote on Nov. 5. If approved, the measure would make North Dakota the first state in the nation without any property taxes, raising questions about how key services and infrastructure that benefit homeowners would continue to be funded there.
On other states, voters will consider more limited property tax exemptions and carveouts, such as tweaks to exceptions for disabled veterans or a separate assessment class for owner-occupied homes.
“While a proposal to eliminate or cap the property tax is surely appealing to homeowners and other property owners, voters should think about these proposals from a cost-benefit framework. The cost of property taxes is ideally offset by the benefit of the services provided by those taxes,” says Realtor.com® chief economist Danielle Hale.
People exiting a polling station in Tucson for early voting on Oct. 16, 2024.Photo by OLIVIER TOURON/AFP via Getty Images
“Many of these services, such as libraries, public schools, public safety services, local road maintenance, and parks and recreation facilities are beneficial to property owners,” she adds. “In the absence of property tax revenue to support these services, governments would have to levy other taxes, such as sales or income taxes, or fees to provide funding or cut back on these services.”
All voters — and especially homeowners — should carefully research state and local ballot measures related to property taxes before heading to the polls, and weigh the pros and cons of any new proposals.
To help voters research proposals in their state, Realtor.com has assembled this guide to state-level, property-related proposals appearing on the Nov. 5 ballot.
Arizona Proposition 312
Proposition 312 would allow for Arizona property owners to apply for a property tax refund if the city or locality in which the property is located does not enforce laws or ordinances regarding illegal camping, loitering, obstructing public thoroughfares, panhandling, public urination or defecation, public consumption of alcoholic beverages, and possession or use of illegal substances.
The swing state’s Republican-controlled state legislature referred the proposed state statute to voters with a simple majority vote in each chamber.
Supporters of the measure say it will force cities to enforce quality-of-life laws already on the books and crack down on homelessness-related violations that lower property values but often go overlooked by local authorities.
“Arizonans deserve safe neighborhoods and a strong economy. Those start with enforcing the law,” says Maricopa County attorney Rachel Mitchell. “Hardworking Arizonans expect a return on what they pay in taxes, like safe streets. They also deserve a refund when the government doesn’t meet its obligations.”
Opponents of the measure say it will do nothing to fix Arizona’s homelessness crisis and simply drain city and county resources that could be better used to address the problem.
“Punishing cities and counties financially when the courts are stopping them from enforcing local laws would lead to a cycle of diminished revenue, making it even harder to assist or relocate the homeless, not to mention the impact on other local services and law enforcement,” say Catherine Sigmon and Melinda Iyer, co-founders of Civic Engagement Beyond Voting.
“Ever heard the saying, ‘The beatings will continue until morale improves’? Why would we try to force cities to do something they can’t do, then punish them for not being able to do it?” they add.
A “yes” vote on Prop 312 supports allowing property owners to apply for a property tax refund if certain ordinances are not enforced. A “no” vote opposes allowing property owners to apply for those exemptions. Read the full ballot question text here.
Colorado Amendment G
Amendment G would expand Colorado’s property tax exemption for veterans with a disability to include veterans with individual unemployability status.
Colorado’s Democrat-controlled state legislature referred the constitutional amendment to voters with full bipartisan support to reach the needed two-thirds majority. No member of the legislature voted against the ballot measure.
The measure would expand the eligibility criteria for the Homestead Property Tax Exemption to include veterans living with a service-related disability who are unable to work.
A line of Florida residents waiting to vote in Clearwater on Nov. 3, 2024.REUTERS/Octavio Jones
The amendment has been endorsed by the editorial boards of the Denver Post, Colorado Springs Gazette, and Denver Gazette. The Colorado Fiscal Institute also supports the measure, saying that it will more effectively address the needs of lower-income Coloradans.
There does not appear to be any significant public campaign opposing Amendment G.
A “yes” vote for Amendment G supports expanding the definition of disabled veterans for the purpose of property tax exemptions. A “no” vote opposes such an expansion.
Amendment G requires support from 55% of voters to pass. Read the full text of the ballot measure here.
Florida Amendment 5
Amendment 5 would provide for an annual inflation adjustment for the value of the homestead property tax exemption in Florida.
Homes in Florida are assessed for tax purposes at market value, minus the homestead tax exemption. The state’s homestead tax exemption is currently $25,000 for primary residences, which exempts that amount from all property taxes except for school district taxes.
The amendment would allow the amount of the homestead tax exemption to increase annually in pace with inflation. The adjustment would be made on Jan. 1 each year, and would be based on the prior year’s percentage change in the Labor Department’s Consumer Price Index, as long as the change was positive.
Florida’s Republican-controlled state legislature placed the proposed constitutional amendment before voters after achieving the necessary 60 percent majority.
Supporters of the amendment say it would provide much-needed relief to homeowners by increasing their exemptions each year at the rate of inflation.
But opponents argue that it would shift property tax burdens to landlords, who don’t quality for the exemption, and could pass the higher costs along to renters.
“Our counties and cities will still need to pay for municipal services and would have to raise their local tax rates to compensate for the revenue loss this tax break would create. So, increasing homestead exemptions is just a shell game,” the Palm Beach Post editorial board wrote in opposition of the measure.
A “yes” vote on Amendment 5 supports an annual inflation adjustment to the amount of assessed value that is exempt from property taxation. A “no” vote opposes such adjustments. Read the full text of the ballot measure here.
Georgia Amendment 1
Amendment 1 would call for a local option homestead property tax exemption in Georgia, while allowing a county, municipality, or school system to opt out of the exemption.
If the amendment passes, it would allow Georgia’s legislature to move forward with HB581, which in essence would cap annual property tax increases at the rate of inflation —but only for existing homeowners. When a home is sold, its assessment limit would reset to the current market value.
The Tax Foundation strongly opposes the measure, saying that it would distort Georgia’s housing market by discouraging homeowners from selling or moving, lest they lose their tax benefit.
Geogria voters casting their ballots in Gwinnett County on Nov. 1, 2024.Nathan Posner/Shutterstock
“This makes it harder for new residents to access housing and could discourage homeownership or shift purchasing patterns to less attractive options among the next generation of Georgia residents who are incentivized to purchase homes that they otherwise would not have purchased,” the group wrote.
Supporters of the measure say it would provide tax relief to homeowners, following a period of rapid increases in property values.
Georgia’s Republican-controlled state legislature referred this proposed constitutional amendment to voters after reaching the necessary two-thirds majority in both chambers.
A “yes” vote on Amendment 1 supports changing Georgia’s constitution to allow for a local option homestead property tax exemption. A “no” vote opposes such a change. Read the full text of the ballot measure here.
Illinois Income Tax Advisory Question
This ballot measure would advise state officials on whether to amend the Illinois Constitution to create an additional 3% tax on income greater than $1 million for the purpose of dedicating funds to property tax relief.
The measure is non-binding and would have no impact on state law but would allow the legislature to gauge public opinion on the matter.
Illinois’ Democrat-controlled state legislature referred the question to voters after achieving a simple majority.
A “yes” vote supports advising state officials on whether to amend the Illinois Constitution to create an additional 3% tax on income greater than $1 million for the purpose of dedicating funds to property tax relief. A “no” vote opposes such advice.
New Mexico Constitutional Amendments 1 & 2
Constitutional Amendment 1 would proportionally apply New Mexico’s disabled-veteran property tax exemption according to a veteran’s disability rating.
Currently, only veterans with a 100% disability and their surviving spouses are eligible for a property tax exemption. The change would allow veterans with less than 100% disability rating to apply for exemption in proportion to their federal disability rating.
A “yes” vote on Amendment 1 supports amending the state constitution to extend the disabled veteran property tax exemption to all disabled veterans (or their surviving spouses) in proportion to their federal disability rating. A “no” vote opposes such a change.
Constitutional Amendment 2 would amend the state constitution to increase the property tax exemption for veterans from $4,000 to $10,000 and adjust it annually for inflation.
Unlike Amendment 1, Amendment 2 applies to all honorably discharged veterans, regardless of disability. New Mexico’s current veterans’ exemption of $4,000 has remained unchanged since 2002.
A “yes” vote on Amendment 2 supports amending the state constitution to increase the property tax exemption for veterans to $10,000 and adjusting it annually for inflation. A “no” vote opposes the change.
This measure would prohibit North Dakota’s state and local governments from levying taxes on the assessed value of any real or personal property, except for those designed to pay for bonded indebtedness.
If approved by voters, it would make North Dakota the first state in the nation to ban property taxes. According to ATTOM Data Solutions, North Dakota homeowners paid an average effective property tax of 0.99% in 2023.
“The North Dakota proposal to eliminate property taxes does not specify what the alternative will be,” says the economist Hale. “The property tax in North Dakota could stand to be reformed, but getting rid of it entirely could create bigger problems than property owners currently face.”
Rick Becker, a Republican former state legislator in North Dakota, spearheaded the initiative, citing rapid recent increases in property taxes in the state.
“Many people, including myself, believe that amongst the taxes, property tax is a fairly immoral tax,” he says. “Private property is the foundation of a free society. The ability for the government to take away something that you should rightfully own is improper.”
Opponents of the measure include the North Dakota Fire Chiefs Association, School Board Association, Sheriffs and Deputies Association, EMS Association, the North Dakota AFL-CIO, the Greater North Dakota Chamber, the North Dakota Farmers Union, and the North Dakota League of Cities.
The Tax Foundation wrote in strong opposition of the proposal, arguing that it would shift the tax burden away from those who most benefit from public services, and force North Dakota to impose new and more harmful taxes at the state level.
“The ballot measure would not deliver on the economic benefits anticipated by its supporters and would undermine the state’s economic competitiveness,” the group wrote. “There’s a genuine need for property tax reform and relief, but outright repeal of the property tax is unsound and would ultimately force a shift to more economically harmful taxes and to state control of local revenues.”
A “yes” vote on Initiated Measure 4 supports a ban on property taxes in North Dakota. A “no” vote opposes such a ban. Read the full text of the measure here.
Oklahoma State Question 833
State Question 833 would allow municipalities to create public infrastructure districts when all property owners within the proposed district sign a petition, and give public infrastructure districts the authority to issue bonds for public improvements if approved by voters within the district.
The amendment would create a new type of district within municipalities, with the authority to issue bonds for public improvements. Those districts would be governed by a board of trustees who would have the power to levy a special assessment of up to 10 mills ($10 per $1,000 of assessed value) on properties benefiting from any improvement projects to be used to pay off those bonds.
Supports of the measure say it would allow homeowners in a neighborhood to create their own tax district to fund needed infrastructure improvements in the area.
Opponents argue it would create a system ripe for abuse by developers, who could sell bonds to fund construction of golf courses and swimming pools, and then pass along the repayment obligation to homeowners in the form of higher property taxes.
“Without guardrails, this State Question is an easy grift that profits a handful at the expense of the rest of us,” says State Rep. Andy Fugate, a Democrat.
A “yes” vote on State Question 833 supports allowing municipalities to create public infrastructure districts. A “no” vote opposes the change. Read the full text of the ballot question here.
Virginia Property Tax Exemption for Veterans and Surviving Spouses Amendment
This measure would amend language in the Virginia Constitution regarding property tax exemptions for veterans and surviving spouses to say “died in the line of duty” rather than “killed in action.”
The small change would expand eligibility for property tax exemptions to the surviving spouses of military members who died in the course of fulfilling their duties, in addition to combat deaths. The line of duty determination would be made by the US Department of Defense.
The exemption, which applies only to a primary residence, would not apply to any surviving spouse who remarries.
Wyoming Property Tax on Residential Property and Owner-Occupied Primary Residences Amendment
This measure adds “residential real property” as a fourth, separate class of property and authorizes the legislature to create a subclass of residential property for “owner-occupied primary residences,” which could be assessed at a different rate from other property in the residential property class.
Currently, Wyoming has only three classes of property for tax purposes: mineral, industrial, and all other. As of last year, the property tax rate in Wyoming was 11.5% for industrial property and 9.5% for commercial, residential, and all other property.
The amendment would allow the state’s legislature to tax owner-occupied homes at a different rate than other types of commercial and residential property.
Supporters of the amendment say that it would provide tax relief for homeowners by allowing them to be taxed at a more favorable rate than large corporations.
Opponents have argued that it would complicate the state’s tax code and potentially put a higher burden on renters and businesses.
In 2020, there were 44,000 single family units started with the intent to rent. In 2023, that number almost doubled to 77,000 units. There were 23,000 single family units started in Q2 2024 built-for-rent, up from 21,000 in Q2 2023.
