With a variety of rising costs frustrating Oklahoma homeowners, legislative leaders are weighing options for property tax reforms to head off a proposed state question that would exempt homestead properties entirely, dramatically reduce local collections and force local and county governments to shrink their services.
In the shadow of an initiative petition proposing State Question 843 — which would phase out property taxes on principle residences — more than 60 bills have been filed to tweak, cap or otherwise reform Oklahoma’s property rules. The legislative proposals range from outright elimination — either across the state or only on homestead residences — to targeted relief, such as increasing the homestead exemption for seniors or capping the maximum rate of increases.
What’s a homestead?
Oklahoma’s existing homestead exemption applies to primary residences and exempts a set amount from a property’s taxable value.
While Republican lawmakers across the board are largely signaling a desire to address the topic, exactly what type of reform would work best is pitting hardline conservatives — who favor property tax elimination — against the party’s more fiscally cautious legislators, who say removing properties from rolls altogether would blow holes in local government budgets.
“The author of that state question knew that there were already senators working all summer long on property tax reform,” Senate President Pro Tempore Lonnie Paxton (R-Tuttle) said Feb. 5. “Because we were hearing from constituents (that) the cost of home ownership — whether it be through property taxes or just insurance cost — was just going up a lot, it is something people are feeling. I feel it. Everybody feels that. So there is your populist jumping in and saying, ‘I’ve got the solution. We will just eliminate property taxes.’ It is very immature. It is very inconsistent with good government.”
Paxton appeared to be referencing Sen. Shane Jett (R-Shawnee), one of three SQ 843 proponents and the chairman of the Oklahoma Freedom Caucus, a state-level affiliate of a national movement aimed at pushing the Republican Party toward more conservative policies. While the caucus does not publicly name all of its members, it has at least 11 publicly known members in Oklahoma, nine of whom serve in the Senate. Jett has said the caucus has more members, but some choose to keep their membership private.
Asked about the Senate leader’s remarks, Jett seemed indifferent to Paxton’s pushback during an interview Feb. 9.
“My concern and my primary responsibility, when I was elected to Senate District 17, was to represent the taxpayer, and that is my focus,” Jett said. “Those who would like to use taxpayer dollars for their own budgets, quite frankly, need to find that revenue elsewhere. They should not be extracting it from the equity that we have accumulated in our homes.”
Although the legislation session only started Feb. 2, Jett and Paxton have already engaged in a public tiff unrelated to property taxes.
Instead, Jett’s allegation that some of his colleagues were drunk on the Senate floor during the final night of the 2025 session has pitted him against Paxton, who chose to call Jett’s claim “baseless” despite broad knowledge around the Capitol that several legislators were drinking as a vote stayed open for five hours.
In an email to Republican senators, Paxton said Jett was “hellbent on dividing this caucus,” and his criticism has only fermented further on the topic of property taxes.
“That is a horrible state question, very poorly thought out,” Paxton said Feb. 5. “The author of that state question simply is trying to draw attention to himself despite what it would do to the state”
Hall: Oklahomans ‘want to see some change’
Despite the infighting, public sentiment and early pressure are hard to ignore as the stage is being set for some form of relief.
“I think the citizens have spoken. I think that they want to see some change, and I think the Legislature will address that in some form or capacity this session,” Senate Appropriations and Budget Committee Chairman Chuck Hall (R-Perry) said at a State Chamber of Oklahoma Press Conference on Jan 21.
Paxton said that, if he gets his way this session, some sort of property tax reform will appear on an Oklahoma ballot in 2026.
“They will have an option sometime this year to vote on some property tax reform,” Paxton said. “But we will (…) pull in schools and the counties and say, ‘Here is what we are thinking about doing. How would this affect you?'”
To kick off the 2026 session during his final State of the State address, Gov. Kevin Stitt referenced public frustration about the cost of living.
“As our property values rise, so do property taxes. And too many Oklahomans — veterans, seniors and young families — are feeling the pressure. Many are concerned they are being priced out of the American Dream,” Stitt said. “We owe Oklahomans real relief, not temporary fixes and election-cycle talking points. We cannot lose the momentum of this moment. I am calling for a state question that freezes property tax growth across the board.”
Stitt is term limited, and in the race to replace him this election cycle, Republican candidates Mike Mazzei, Jake Merrick and Charles McCall have already weighed in on property taxes. Mazzei, a former state senator, wants to eliminate property taxes on homes, suggesting a phased rollout to limit disruption. McCall recently tweeted that he would “freeze property taxes for all Oklahomans, 62 and older on their homestead.” Merrick has posted about Oklahoma having created “an entire system on an unjust tax.”
Asked about property taxes Feb. 9 after he spoke to the Senate Republican Caucus, Stitt said “a total elimination would not be reasonable,” and he suggested such proposals are “just kind of talking points.”
“But a freeze, like I said in my state of the state, would be reasonable,” Stitt said. “Or maybe an overall cap in collections in a county that can only go up 3 percent per year. But if you are developing and building, then there is a distribution back to the homeowner. So the big purpose here is to try to hold property taxes down and not have automatic 3 to 5 percent escalations on seniors, working families and people just trying to make ends meet.”
Rep. Jay Steagall (R-Yukon) is among the three proponents of the SQ 843 initiative petition, for which signatures are not yet being collected. While Steagall applauded the governor for acknowledging a need for property tax relief, he said simply capping or freezing tax rates would not be enough.
“What we are hearing more and more from our constituents is that it is not really a freeze that they are after,” Steagall said. “They are after the elimination of property taxes.”
Likewise, Jett said Oklahoma’s property tax system needs to be reformed and eliminated for homeowners across the board, not just for certain groups like seniors or military veterans.
“Whenever we start piece-mealing the relief and we carve out a group that is more special than other groups, those more special groups tend to go on with their lives, raising kids, investing and putting money in the bank,” Jett said. “They forget that the other part of the population is not part of the privileged group.”
While many Republican lawmakers appear on board with some form of property tax relief, they remain steadfast in their concerns about reducing the revenue generated for local governments by property taxes, which are referred to as “ad valorem” taxes in Oklahoma.
“Do we need some reform? We will all agree on that, and I think there’s a lot of reform bills,” said House Common Education Committee Chairman Dick Lowe (R-Amber). “When you are going to take away revenue, you need to look at what you are going to replace it with, because we still want education. We still want our tech centers. We still have value in all of our county officers. And so I think — I hope — people will look at it in reality.”
Legislators worry how to ‘replace the dollars’
(Editor’s note: The interactive map above shows estimated property taxes for homesteaded residences by county for Oklahoma’s 2025 tax year.)
Lowe is not alone in his concerns.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle wonder how local school districts, career tech centers, libraries, hospitals, municipalities and counties would maintain funding levels if the proposal from Jett, Steagall and former GOP Rep. Mike Reynolds wins the day.
“I have not seen (…) a plan to replace it with anything,” Senate Education Committee Chairman Adam Pugh (R-Edmond) said at a press conference Jan. 15. “I have not seen it, and it has not been discussed.”
Senate Minority Leader Julia Kirt echoed Pugh’s concern.
“That is going to undermine public safety. It is going to undermine our local schools. [Property tax] is a primary driver and a very reliable driver of local development,” said Kirt (D-OKC). “Do the people of Oklahoma still want public safety? Do they still want bridges and roads outside of the city? Do they want public schools and public health? I believe they do.”
House Minority Leader Cyndi Munson (D-OKC) expressed similar concerns as her Senate counterpart.
“We need to be very careful about these across-the-board tax eliminations,” Munson said. “If we were to cut property tax and the governor gets his way on eliminating the income tax, how are we going to fund services and things people need and rely on?”
House Speaker Kyle Hilbert (R-Bristow) said lawmakers must consider long-term sustainability when it comes to any type of tax relief.
“Both chambers are going to work hand-in-hand and are trying to figure out a solution that makes sense to bring some relief for our homeowners,” Hilbert said.
Lowe said property tax changes are a scary proposition because most school districts and local governments have taken out bonds for building and infrastructure projects that obligate them to pay back the loans with property taxes over 20 or 30 years.
“It is not a tax on your property,” Lowe said. “It is a tax paying for the services you expect as a citizen of that county. That is what it really is. People have misrepresented it, in my view, as being a tax to own your property. But it is not. It is a service tax.”
Still, Lowe said he supports relief for senior citizens in particular, and he pointed to HJR 1081 by Rep. Robert Manger (R-OKC).
A former U.S. marshal, Manger said he has been studying and preparing his property tax reform proposal for years.
“In a nutshell, at age 65, when you are living in the house seven years and the house is valued at $700,000 or less, it would freeze your ad valorem taxes,” Manger said. “That is all it does. It freezes it — just (on) the one where your homestead is.”
At the Jan. 21 State Chamber of Oklahoma press conference, Hall discussed where he thinks the conversation should head.
“I think it needs to come with a plan. It is not something that we can just jump into to take care of. I mean we have got to be able to replace the dollars as we look to this notion of eliminating the property tax,” Hall said. “Frankly, I think that there are better approaches (that are) more appealing. I think you will see that coming out of the Senate. I think that you will see us address something along the lines of taking care of our seniors.”
Paxton said Feb. 5 that he does not know where the conversation will land.
“I have got an issue out there that would lower the rate of increases for the valuations of a home from 3 percent on homesteads and 5 percent on everything else [to] 1 and 3 instead of 3 and 5 (percent),” Paxton said. “I also have something that raises the homestead exemption.”
Property tax reform fight shows caucus crevice
While some of his peers have criticized SQ 843 for lacking a plan to replace local revenue, Steagall cited the single-subject nature of initiative petitions and argued the Legislature could respond to any issues after passage.
“Usually, the government does not respond until it has to,” Steagall said. “Those that oppose this idea may be a little worried about the change and how effective the Legislature may be in handling this, and I can understand those fears. However, because the legislative body and the members that make it up are responsible to the people that they work for, if that money does not end up back in the local community like it is supposed to, we are going to hear about it.”
Jett also supports forcing government into action.
“We need to hold the government accountable, because they will continue to grow unless an artificial force requires them to stop growing,” Jett said. “I am not as interested in recouping (revenue) as everyone who is losing that money, because it is not their money to begin with. It belongs to the taxpayer.”
Steagall and Jett have both filed legislation that seeks to eliminate property taxes on homestead residences in the same manner as their proposed state question: a stair-stepped, percent-based increase in the exemption that would culminate in a 100 percent removal from tax rolls. Steagall seeks to do so through HB 3308, while Jett filled SB 1885.
Jett has also introduced SB 1815, which primarily seeks to make owners and residents of manufactured homes — who do not own the land upon which their property is located — eligible for homestead exemptions.
Provided the owners are actual residents of Oklahoma, “a homestead shall include a manufactured home or a fixed structure located on land not owned by the owner,” SB 1815 reads. Buried in the legislation is a major change to the homestead exemption, raising the exemption from $1,000 to “the full amount” of the assessed valuation.
Jett said he would prefer his property tax exemption proposal to go through the legislative process, but he said a workaround has become necessary because “our colleagues are addicted to the narcotic of spending other people’s money.”
Meanwhile, Sen. David Bullard (R-Durant) has proposed SJR 23, which would open the door to property tax elimination by placing a ballot question in front of voters to move ad valorem language from the Oklahoma Constitution to state statute. It would also freeze property tax valuations on all homesteads, provide a full property tax exemption on homesteads for owners 65 and older “that do not have certain debt attached to the property” and allow for counties to levy consumption taxes “to provide funding for the schools districts, services and service districts” beginning Jan. 1, 2030.
In a press release promoting his resolution, Bullard said consumption taxes constitute a fair system that could continue funding schools and local governments.
“Oklahoma is long overdue for property tax relief for all homeowners, especially those who are retired and live on a fixed income,” Bullard said. “Removing that tax burden will ease the financial strain that many seniors feel every single day.”
Munson, however, disagreed about the fairness question.
“That burden will be placed on working people,” Munson said. “The wealthiest could probably shoulder it. We cannot.”
Bullard’s SJR 15, which was filed in 2025, seeks to eliminate property taxes outright and is also available for a hearing this month. He believes changes to property taxation would ease the path to homeownership and solve what he calls a “constitutional disagreement.”
“If in order to own property, you have to first pay the government their tax, do you really own that property?” Bullard asked. “The answer is, ‘No,’ you do not own your property. You are renting it from the government.”
Bullard often pushes for more fiscally and socially conservative legislation, and he nearly defeated Paxton in an election to lead the chamber ahead of the 2025 legislative session. While Bullard sometimes represents a push for more conservative policies, Paxton has been known to urge greater fiscal caution in revenue conversations.
Bullard’s 2026 proposal could be a more palatable approach to property tax reform than his 2025 version, he said. It seeks to address the concerns of lawmakers like Paxton with a pathway to recoup revenue.
“When I filed a complete abolition of property tax, a lot of it was — and I filed it early last year and this year — to have that conversation,” Bullard said. “The whole point of this thing is to have the conversation. Let’s talk it through and figure out, ‘How does this work and what is a responsible way to do it?’ (…) I think there is a supermajority of the state that are ready and willing and able to get rid of property taxes. The question is always going to be, how?”
Bullard said his SJR 23 “gives you a pathway” to eliminate property taxes.
“If that State Question (843) on completely abolishing it immediately gets to the ballot box, it is going to pass,” Bullard said. “And so I think that is why we need to start having the conversation and asking questions. We have got to have an alternative to say, ‘This is how we want to do it, or not do it.'”
Other members of the Republican Party’s most conservative wing have their own proposals. Freedom Caucus member Sen. Lisa Standridge (R-Norman) filed SB 2000, which would raise homestead exemptions from $1,000 to $5,000.
“Property taxes never go away, and over the years, have put an ever-increasing tax yoke around the neck of anyone who might wish to own their home,” Standridge said in a press release. “We must reverse this trend, or homeownership — a vital part of the American Dream — will no longer be attainable here in Oklahoma.”
Freedom Caucus member Sen. Dusty Deevers (R-Elgin) filed SJR 35 in pursuit of a ballot question to repeal several sections of the Oklahoma Constitution “which would eliminate all property taxes in this state and the taxing jurisdictions.”
‘Sad day in camp’: Stakeholders sound alarm
Concerns about decreasing property tax revenue stretch far beyond the State Capitol.
Revenues from property taxes on homesteads are projected to reach $1.4 billion for the 2025 tax year, according to the Oklahoma Tax Commission. Such dollars fund local services like public schools and public safety. According to OTC data, they are projected to total anywhere from $235,687 to $339.5 million in revenue per county.
In a July article published by the Tax Foundation, vice president of state tax policy Manish Bhatt wrote that property tax accounts for 56 percent of local tax revenue in Oklahoma.
“Eliminating it would mean compromising the local services that Oklahomans rely on each day or shifting to far more economically harmful forms of taxation,” Bhatt wrote.
According to the Tax Foundation, only Arkansas and Alabama collected less in state and local property taxes per capita in Fiscal Year 2022 than Oklahoma, which collected $942 per capita.
The possibility of the funding source diminishing has caused anxiety among stakeholders who provide local services, some of whom fear the public would overwhelmingly support any property tax proposal, even outright elimination, if placed on their ballots.
“We are on the wrong side of what the people may want because we have not explained to the people what they are going to get,” said Ray McNair, executive director of the Oklahoma Sheriffs’ Association.
McNair questioned the purpose of broadly eliminating property taxes on homesteads and warned of the consequences.
“We are one of the lowest tax states in the country, right? What are we solving by doing this?” McNair asked. “What are we gaining by giving the people this freedom? In return for what? The return is: You are going to force county government to be very ineffective. (…) People out there with the cattle that get out and get in the middle of the highway, you are going to have to call some troopers because there will not be sheriff’s deputies to be able to get out there and help.”
Some education stakeholders, however, feel more confident that voters could think beyond their anti-tax instincts.
“It will never pass,” said Edmond Public Schools chief financial officer Jim Dobson. “Schools get so much money from property taxes. If you did not have property taxes, then where would the state get the money from?”
But if a future with less property tax revenue does come to pass, the impact could be disastrous, according to Kingfisher Public Schools Superintendent Andy Evans.
“If they do this, there is not a sustainable way to run schools in the state of Oklahoma and keep the same level of instructional abilities that we have,” Evans said. “Tulsa and Oklahoma City? That is a sad day in camp. Edmond? Sadder day in camp. Deer Creek? Disastrous day in camp.”
While property taxes make up a significant funding stream for public school districts, the money can be used for a limited number of needs, primarily building, transportation or technology projects. In 2018, the Oklahoma Legislature asked voters to allow schools to use property tax revenue for operational needs, but State Question 801 failed after receiving only 49.6 percent support.
According to a frequently asked questions document published by the Oklahoma State School Boards Association, 26 percent of public school revenue is generated from property taxes, including taxes approved for school bonds. Districts’ obligations to pay their bond debt has some worried about the SQ 843 proposal.
“Those existing bonds are a big part of the conversation,” said Paxton, a former city councilor and mayor of Tuttle. “Somebody has got to pay it. It is a debt that somebody has to pay. That is why you do not just throw a state question out there that eliminates property taxes on homestead-exempted homes. I think on the existing debts, I think it just gets shifted to everyone who is not exempted. So that means every farmer and renter and business owner.”
Bonds are used across the state to fund investments like new school facilities, public safety centers and street projects.
Jett said he would like to see a shift away from what he calls an “indebtedness spending government” attributable to the use of bonds.
“Our argument is that those cuts are healthy,” Jett said. “They will not cut unless they are forced to. What we would also like to see is a pivot from an ‘indebtedness spending’ government, where you are pushing it forward into the future.”
SQ 843, which has been refiled twice since being rolled out as SQ 841, does not include a provision stating the exemption would not apply to “ad valorem taxes levied for the payment of principal or interest on any valid bond indebtedness.” SQ 841 and SQ 842 had included such language.
(Update: This article was updated at 8:45 a.m. Tuesday, Feb. 17, to include reference to a comment by Jake Merrick.)
