Montana homeowners frustrated by years of rising property tax bills could see significant relief on the November 2026 ballot — or a cascade of unintended consequences — depending on which side of the debate you ask. Three proposed ballot initiatives seeking to cap annual property tax increases are now working their way through Montana’s initiative process, drawing support from taxpayer advocates and sharp criticism from local governments, school districts, and tax policy experts.
Why It Matters
Property taxes have become a flashpoint across the Mountain West as rising home values have driven up tax bills for middle-class homeowners, many of whom have lived in their communities for decades. Montana is no exception. While the 2025 state legislature passed changes backed by Governor Greg Gianforte that reduced many homeowners’ bills, supporters of the new ballot efforts say those changes didn’t go far enough.
For Montanans already stretched by inflation and a rapidly changing housing market, the outcome of these initiatives could reshape how local governments fund schools, roads, and essential services for years to come.
What Happened
Three separate initiatives proposing to cap annual property tax increases at 2% have been introduced in Montana, each taking a slightly different approach to the problem of rising residential and commercial property valuations.
Two of the three — CI-129 and CI-130 — were authored by former Republican state legislator Matt Monforton, director of the ballot campaign group Cap Montana Property Taxes, and have been cleared by the state for signature gathering. A third proposal from Sen. Wylie Galt, R-Martinsdale, is currently under review by the Montana attorney general’s office.
To appear on the November ballot, each initiative requires signatures from more than 60,000 qualified Montana voters by June 19. Whether any of the three will reach that threshold remains unclear.
What the Proposals Would Do
CI-129 would amend the Montana Constitution to limit annual increases in a primary residence’s assessed valuation to 2%, unless the property undergoes physical improvements or changes ownership. When a property changes hands, it would be reassessed at fair market value starting January 1 of the following year. Only one primary residence per person would qualify, and owners must occupy the home for at least seven months of the year.
CI-130 takes a broader approach, applying the same 2% annual valuation cap to all real property — residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural. Currently, Montana’s Department of Revenue assesses residential properties at estimated market value, while other property types are assessed based largely on land use.
Sen. Galt’s proposal would also cap property tax increases at 2% per year through a constitutional amendment, but differs from the other two in that the cap would not apply to school district mills or levies. Voters would also retain the ability to approve mill levies exceeding the cap. That proposal’s language is expected to be revised based on feedback from the Legislative Services Division, the attorney general, and the governor’s budget office.
By the Numbers
- All three initiatives propose capping annual property valuation increases at 2% per year
- Each initiative needs signatures from more than 60,000 Montana voters to qualify for the ballot
- The signature deadline is June 19
- Current state law allows local governments to raise property taxes by the prior year’s assessed amount plus up to the average inflation rate of the prior three years, not to exceed 4%
- A new tax on second homes targeting wealthy, out-of-state property owners took effect this year as part of the 2025 legislative changes
Zoom Out
Montana’s property tax debate mirrors broader tensions playing out across the Mountain West, where booming real estate markets have priced out longtime residents while also driving up tax bills for those who stayed. Wyoming lawmakers recently addressed a different kind of government accountability issue when they voted to expand ethics training following a campaign finance controversy — but fiscal pressure on state and local budgets is a common thread across the region.
Tax experts warn the initiatives could produce results their supporters don’t intend. Steven Sheffrin, a property tax expert and professor emeritus at Tulane University, told Montana Free Press that local governments facing revenue shortfalls would likely seek funding elsewhere.
“These things never occur in a vacuum,” Sheffrin said. “If there is a demand for the service, people are going to try to find a way to pay for them. That will be other taxes.”
Sheffrin also noted that CI-129 could create long-term inequity between longtime homeowners — whose assessments would remain capped — and new buyers, who would face market-rate assessments upon purchase. CI-130, he said, is less predictable and may not meaningfully reduce property taxes since it does not limit the number of mills local governments can levy to offset revenue losses.
School advocates have raised particular concern that the two Monforton-authored initiatives could force school districts to pursue alternative funding through income taxes or other mechanisms.
What’s Next
Initiative supporters must collect the required signatures before the June 19 deadline. Sen. Galt’s proposal remains under attorney general review and has not yet been approved for signature gathering; its language is expected to be revised before that process begins.
If any or all of the initiatives qualify for the ballot, Montana voters would weigh in this November. Local governments, school districts, and taxpayer advocacy groups are expected to mount active campaigns on both sides of the debate in the months ahead.
The push for property tax relief in Montana comes as similar debates over government spending, taxation, and the proper role of local authorities continue to gain traction in neighboring states. Montana’s Helena City Commission has also been navig
About the Author
