Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Agriculture Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board OKs public hearing on removing six-year revalidation for land-use tax program
Summary
Southampton County supervisors authorized a March public hearing on an ordinance change that would remove the current six-year revalidation requirement for land-use taxation and raise the initial application fee from $50 to $100, following Farm Bureau support and county staff recommendations.
The Southampton County Board of Supervisors voted Feb. 25 to advertise a public hearing for March 25 on an amendment to the county’s land-use taxation ordinance that would remove the optional six-year revalidation requirement for participating parcels and increase the initial application fee.
County staff explained the change would reduce administrative burden for property owners and the commissioner of the revenue’s office. “The revalidation requirement is optional, as you can see by state code,” county staff said in presenting the proposal and recommended eliminating the $25 revalidation fee while raising the initial application fee from $50 to $100 to offset revenue loss.
Chris Drake, representing the Southampton County Farm Bureau, told the board the Farm Bureau supports the proposed change, saying the revalidation process can create difficulties for older landowners and places paperwork burdens on both landowners and county staff. Drake said Farm Bureau represents roughly 500 producer members in the county and that revalidation issues rarely turn up as substantive compliance problems.
County staff and the commissioner’s office said most significant changes—such as when land is removed from agriculture or subdivided—are already reported and would still trigger review; removing the six-year paperwork requirement would rely more on existing audit processes and the Farm Service Agency information to detect noncompliance.
Supervisors voted to move the ordinance amendment forward for public hearing; the vote to advertise the hearing passed with the motion moved and seconded and the board saying “aye.”
If the board takes final action after the public hearing, county staff said the commissioner’s office would implement internal review procedures to monitor compliance.
