State Question · every Oklahoma voter

State Question 847How fast property tax values can rise

Legislative referendum (constitutional amendment): Legislative Referendum 381, placed on the ballot by the Legislature as Senate Joint Resolution 39 . Passes with a majority of the votes cast on the question.

Read the full text of the measure: Secretary of State file, pages 1 to 6 (PDF)

In plain words

Each year your county sets a value for your land and buildings and figures your property tax from it. The state constitution limits how much that value can go up in one year. SQ 847 makes those yearly limits smaller, so property tax bills would grow more slowly. It also changes the "senior freeze," a rule that stops the taxed value of an older homeowner's house from going up. (ballot title )

Before and after

Question	Today	If SQ 847 passes (from 2027)
The home you live in, or farmland: how much can its taxed value go up in one year?	3% at most	1.75% at most
Other property, like businesses, rentals and second homes: how much can its taxed value go up in one year?	5% at most	4% at most
Homeowners 65+ whose household income is at or below the middle income for their county	Taxed value can't go up	No change: still can't go up
Homeowners 65+ who earn more than that	Can go up 3% a year, like everyone else	Can go up 0.35% to 1.75% a year; the more you earn, the higher the limit
The year a property is sold or improved	Value resets to what the property is worth	No change

Numbers from the official ballot title (ballot title ); also see (okpolicy.org )

Example

Illustration only: a home you live in, valued by the county at $200,000. Today that value can go up at most $6,000 next year (3% of $200,000). Under SQ 847 it can go up at most $3,500 (1.75% of $200,000). How much tax you pay on that value depends on your local tax rates. "Middle income" means the county's median household income, as set by the federal housing department (HUD). (ballot title )

Who it affects most: People who own homes or farmland where prices are rising fast, homeowners 65 and older who earn more than their county's middle income, and the schools, counties and cities that property taxes pay for.

Cost to the state: Unknown. The official ballot title says it would affect the state budget but does not say by how much.

Our plain-words summary. Every line points to its source.

What your vote means

YES

Your property's taxed value can go up less each year (1.75% instead of 3% for homes and farmland, 4% instead of 5% for other property), and more seniors get a small yearly limit.

The yearly limits stay at 3% for homes and farmland and 5% for other property, and the senior freeze stays the same.

Our one-line summary. Oklahoma does not publish an official "what your vote means" statement; the ballot title above is the official description.

Why people want it, and why others object

Why this is on the ballot

The Legislature put this on the ballot. It changes the state constitution, so only another statewide vote can change it back. It passes with a simple majority of the votes cast on it.

Senate leader Lonnie Paxton says voters rank property taxes as their second-biggest issue, after education, as home values have climbed. source: oklahomavoice.com

Why supporters want it

House Speaker Kyle Hilbert (R-Bristow), the House author: "Oklahomans deserve real protection against the rapid rise in the value of their homes for tax purposes." source: okhouse.gov
Hilbert on the senior changes: "Seniors often live on a fixed income, so tax relief for them ensures they are not priced out of their homes." He says the limits rise with income so seniors aren't discouraged from working. source: okhouse.gov
Senate leader Lonnie Paxton (R-Tuttle), the Senate author, says the goal is to slow property tax growth and help people on fixed incomes stay in their homes. He said rising values are a reason school bond votes fail: "Voters just think they have had enough." source: oklahomavoice.com
The Oklahoma Farm Bureau supports it, saying smaller yearly limits better protect farm and ranch owners. source: news9.com
Supporters say it gives long-term relief without cutting what local services get today, and gives schools and local governments time to adjust. source: okpolicy.org

Why opponents object

State Rep. Ellen Pogemiller (D, House District 88): "Lower caps will mean slower growth. Which means less revenue for schools, CareerTechs, and roads." source: news9.com
Sen. Carri Hicks (D-Oklahoma City) says it would tax similar homes on the same street very differently: "Long-time owners benefit," and "New buyers shoulder more of the burden." source: oklahomavoice.com
The Oklahoma Policy Institute says it is not a tax cut, since current bills won't go down; that it could raise bills if local tax rates rise to cover bond payments; and that big businesses would get a large share of the benefit. source: okpolicy.org

Who backs each side

For: House Speaker Kyle Hilbert and Senate leader Lonnie Paxton (both Republicans), and the Oklahoma Farm Bureau. source: news9.com
Against: some Democratic lawmakers, and the Oklahoma Policy Institute, a nonprofit research group. We have not yet found a campaign committee or reported campaign money for either side. source: news9.com

In each side's own words where we could find them, quoted or summarized with a link to the source. We don't endorse either side.

What you will see on your ballot

Official ballot wording, word for word (tap to open)

The official ballot title, word for word from the Secretary of State's State Question file .

This measure amends article 10, sections 8B and 8C of the Oklahoma Constitution. Currently, section 8B limits annual growth in fair cash value to 5% for most real property or 3% for homesteads and agricultural land. If approved, the measure would limit annual growth in fair cash value for tax year 2027 and after to 4% for most real property or 1.75% for homesteads and agricultural land. Currently, section 8C prohibits any increase in fair cash value of homestead property for persons age sixty-five (65) or older whose income does not exceed certain limits, sometimes referred to as the “senior freeze.” Instead of prohibiting any increase in fair cash value for these homesteads, there would be an annual limit of 1.75%. The measure eliminates the income cap on gross household income to qualify for the senior freeze. If approved, the annual limit on an increase in fair cash value would be tied to how much gross household income the homestead owner had in the preceding year. If a homeowner’s gross household income from the previous year was at or below the median income for their county or area (as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s estimated median income amount for the county or metropolitan statistical area), a homeowner’s homestead fair cash value cannot be increased. If the income amount was in excess of certain thresholds, the limit on increases in fair cash value for homesteads owned by persons age 65 or older could be 0.35% (income over 100% up to 120%); 0.7% (income over 120% up to 140%); 1.05% (income over 140% up to 160%); 1.4% (income over 160% up to 180%); or 1.75% (income over 180%). If passed, this measure would have a fiscal impact on the state, but the exact impact is unknown.

Shall the proposal be approved?
For the proposal – YES
Against the proposal – NO

This is the final ballot title the Attorney General rewrote and filed on June 3, 2026 (page 12 of the Secretary of State file). The legislature's own proposed title, printed in the resolution, was replaced.

At a glance

Our plain-words summary. Every line points to its source.

Who it affects

Homes people live in, and farmland: today the value the county taxes can go up at most 3% a year. Starting in 2027 the limit would be 1.75%. (ballot title )
Other property, like businesses, rentals and second homes: the limit drops from 5% to 4% a year. (ballot title )
Homeowners 65 and older: today, if their household income is at or below their county's middle income, their taxed value can't go up at all. That stays the same. Those who earn more get no freeze today; under SQ 847 their taxed value could go up only 0.35% to 1.75% a year, depending on income. (ballot title )
In the year a property is sold or improved, the limits don't apply, and the county resets its value to what it is worth. (okpolicy.org )

How many: Everyone who owns land or buildings in Oklahoma, plus the schools, counties and cities that property taxes pay for.

Money: economic and budget impact

The official ballot title says it would affect the state budget but does not say by how much. (ballot title )
It doesn't lower anyone's bill today. It slows how fast property tax money grows for schools and local governments. Where voters approved borrowing (bonds), local tax rates may have to rise to make the payments. (okpolicy.org )

If it passes

The smaller limits start in 2027, and the new income-based limits for seniors replace today's income rule.

If it fails

The limits stay at 3% for homes and farmland and 5% for other property, and the senior freeze stays the same.

Not yet known

How much money schools, counties and the state would get or lose. The ballot title says this is unknown.

What it could mean for schools and local services

It doesn't cut what schools, counties and cities get today. It slows how fast that money can grow in later years, because property tax is a big part of how they are paid for. source: okpolicy.org
These limits are written into the state constitution. Raising them again later would take another statewide vote. source: ballotpedia.org
Where voters already approved borrowing (bonds) for schools or roads, local tax rates may have to go up to keep making the payments. Opponents say that would raise bills for every owner, including seniors whose value is frozen. source: okpolicy.org
Opponents say rural schools that already run on thin budgets would feel it most, and some could lean more on state aid or have to merge with other districts. source: okpolicy.org
Values still reset when a property is sold. Critics say that over time, new buyers would pay more than long-time owners of similar homes on the same street. source: oklahomavoice.com
Money: the Oklahoma Tax Commission estimated about $85.4 million less property tax in the 2028 budget year for the bill as it stood in April 2026. We could not confirm that this estimate matches the final version on the ballot. The official ballot title says the exact effect is unknown. source: southwestledger.news

Our plain-words summary of reporting and analysis. Each line links to its source.

Latest news

Recent reporting from a range of outlets, newest first. We link to it; we don't endorse it.

No articles collected yet for this measure.

Full text of the measure

The resolution shows wording being removed in strikeout type, which we can't reproduce reliably here. Read it in the Secretary of State file, pages 1 to 6 (PDF) , or on the Legislature's page for Senate Joint Resolution 39 , which also shows the votes in each chamber.

We link to analysis from several sources; we don't endorse it.