WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 1389

A BILL for an Act to amend and reenact sections 11-11-55.1, 40-22-01.3, and 57-15-41 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to infrastructure fees levied by cities and counties, and the exemption of infrastructure fees from levy limitations.

69th Legislative Assembly (2025-26) Introduced by Dick Dever and 3 co-sponsors

ND HB1389 would let counties/municipalities levy infrastructure fees on utility bills to fund maintenance, with project zones, protest rights, and exemption from levy caps.

Second reading, failed to pass, yeas 3 nays 44
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 1389

HB 1389 — Summary (North Dakota, 2025 session)

Status: Introduced Nov 18, 2024. Second reading — failed to pass (yeas 3, nays 44).

Sponsored/Introduced Sections Amended: North Dakota Century Code sections 11-11-55.1, 40-22-01.3, and 57-15-41.

Main purpose

HB 1389 would authorize counties and municipalities to levy an "infrastructure fee" (collected via utility bills) in lieu of certain general special assessments to pay for infrastructure maintenance, establish notice and protest procedures for project zones funded by such fees, and clarify that infrastructure fees are exempt from statutory tax levy limits.

Key provisions

  • Adds/updates statutory authority to levy an infrastructure fee:
    • Counties: board of county commissioners may, by resolution or upon petition of 60% of landowners in a defined area (outside city limits), levy an infrastructure fee in lieu of general special assessments. Alternatively, a county may act on a petition of 60% of the qualified electors who voted in the last general election in the defined area.
    • Municipalities: notwithstanding existing law, a city may levy and collect an infrastructure fee to replace a general special assessment for infrastructure maintenance; a municipality that levies the fee may still impose "green field" special assessments.
  • Infrastructure fees are billed on residential and commercial county/city utility bills; money collected must be used only for infrastructure maintenance (municipal provision explicitly states this).
  • Project-specific "infrastructure zones": each proposed project must have an infrastructure zone. The governing unit must mail notice to each utility account holder in the zone with:
    • total project cost; project description; public hearing date/time; and a protest form.
  • Protest and hearing timeline:
    • Protest period: notice must give at least 30 days to submit a protest form.
    • Public hearing must be held no earlier than 14 days after notice and before the protest deadline.
    • If a majority of utility account holders in the proposed zone submit protest forms, the project may not proceed in that zone. If not, the project may begin after the protest period ends.
  • Fee rate cap: rate charged to commercial property may not exceed two times the rate charged residential property.
  • Definitions added/clarified:
    • "General special assessments" — assessments for maintaining existing roads/infrastructure or construction/repair of arterial roads benefiting the whole community.
    • "Green field special assessments" — assessments for infrastructure associated with development of agricultural or undeveloped property.
  • Levy-limit exemption (section 57-15-41): tax levy limitations would not apply to tax levies by political subdivisions for paying special assessments and the infrastructure fees described in the amended sections, nor to debt service on bonds issued to prepay special assessments. Any surplus in a special assessment fund would revert to the political subdivision’s general fund after obligations are paid.

Who is affected

  • Counties and municipalities: gain a new financing option (infrastructure fees) and procedural requirements for adoption.
  • Residential and commercial utility account holders in designated zones: potential new fees on utility bills to fund maintenance projects; right to protest.
  • Political subdivisions generally: infrastructure fee-related levies and associated debt service would be exempt from levy limitations.

Procedural/timeline aspects

  • Petitions: 60% threshold (landowners or qualified electors, as specified) to authorize county action.
  • Notice/hearing/protest timing: minimum 14-day wait to hearing after notice; protest window at least 30 days; majority-protest veto.
  • Commercial/residential rate relationship limited to 2:1.
  • As of the available record, the measure failed on second reading (vote 3–44) and therefore did not advance.

Potential effects / considerations

  • Provides an alternative, utility-billed revenue stream for infrastructure maintenance that may simplify collection compared with parcel special assessments.
  • Could shift costs onto utility account holders (including rental properties) and affect affordability.
  • Levy-limit exemption could allow additional local spending capacity outside existing caps, potentially increasing local fiscal flexibility — or raising concerns about erosion of levy controls.
  • The petitioner and protest mechanics create local democratic checks (60% petition threshold; majority protest can block a zone).

[This summary is based on the engrossed North Dakota bill text amending NDCC 11-11-55.1, 40-22-01.3, and 57-15-41 and on the bill’s legislative status notes.]

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.