WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HJR V

Elections: millage; certain voter participation in elections to authorize or increase a millage; require. Amends sec. 31, art. IX of the state constitution.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Jim DeSana and 8 co-sponsors

From 2027, new local taxes or tax rate increases require both a majority vote and at least 30% turnout.

joint resolution electronically reproduced 06/02/2026
#constitutionalamendments:state #elections:millage
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HJR V

Overview

HJR V is a proposed Michigan constitutional amendment that would change how local units of government (cities, townships, counties, etc.) obtain voter consent for new taxes or for increasing existing taxes that are not already authorized by law or charter. The measure would impose specific voter participation thresholds beginning January 1, 2027, and would affect millages and related property taxes, with certain exceptions.

Purpose and intent

  • To require direct voter approval for new taxes or for increasing the rate of an existing tax, effective from 2027 onward.
  • To ensure a higher level of citizen participation in decisions about local government taxation, by mandating a dual standard of consent: a majority approval and a minimum turnout threshold.
  • To preserve existing tax instruments like debt service (principal and interest on bonds) and certain contract obligations from these new constraints.

Key provisions and changes

  1. Standards for approving new or increased taxes
    • Before January 1, 2027: A simple majority of qualified electors voting on the question is required for approval.
    • Beginning January 1, 2027: Two requirements must be met for approval:
      • At least 30% of the qualified electors in the local government unit must vote on the question.
      • A majority of the qualified electors voting on the question must approve.
  2. Scope of application
    • Applies to taxes not authorized by law or charter, and to increases in the rate of existing taxes that are not authorized by law or charter at ratification.
  3. Adjustments to tax base and revenue guarantees
    • If the base of an existing tax is broadened, the maximum authorized rate must be adjusted so that the estimated gross revenue remains the same as before the base change.
    • If property assessment values (excluding new construction/improvements) rise faster than the General Price Level, the maximum rate must be reduced to maintain similar gross revenue from existing property, adjusted for price-level changes.
  4. Exemptions from the new limitations
    • Taxes imposed to pay principal and interest on bonds or other indebtedness, or for payments on contract obligations tied to pre-existing bond authorization, are not subject to these limitations.
  5. Implementation and submission
    • The amendment would be placed before voters at the next general election following its adoption, as required by law.

Who is affected

  • Local government units (cities, villages, townships, counties, and potentially other municipal entities) that levy taxes or millages.
  • Taxpayers within those units, since new or increased taxes would require both a 30% turnout and a majority vote.
  • Entities issuing debt or handling bonds, which would retain existing protections from these voting thresholds.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Effective date for new turnout/majority requirements: January 1, 2027.
  • Pre-2027 standard: A simple majority vote suffices for approval.
  • Post-2027 standard: Requires both a minimum turnout (30% of qualified electors) and a majority approval.
  • Next steps if approved in the general election: The measure would be legally binding once certified and would govern all applicable local tax actions thereafter.
  • Introduction and sponsorship: Introduced June 2, 2026 by Rep. Brad Paquette with multiple co-sponsors; referred to the Committee on Election Integrity.

Potential impact considerations

  • Higher hurdle for local tax measures that require voter approval, potentially slowing or preventing new millage approvals or increases.
  • Voters who are engaged but represent less than 30% turnout could impact outcomes, adding a turnout risk to tax-related ballot questions.
  • Tax policy stability for debt and pre-authorized obligations remains intact, reducing risk to existing financing plans.
  • Administrative implications for local governments in budgeting and tax rate planning, particularly around base revisions and price-level adjustments.

If you’d like, I can provide a side-by-side comparison with current Michigan tax-approval rules or draft a plain-language summary for publication.

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

Sign in to ask a question.