Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Revenue And Taxation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee introduces 'truth in taxation' notice requirement for local tax increases
Summary
The House Revenue and Taxation Committee on March 5 introduced RS 32,605, a bill sponsored by Representative David Cannon that would require mailed notices and newspaper publication when local taxing districts propose tax increases; the measure was introduced over one recorded dissent and will undergo a full hearing.
Representative David Cannon introduced RS 32,605 to the House Revenue and Taxation Committee on March 5, proposing a "truth in taxation" requirement that would obligate local taxing districts to publish a notice in the newspaper and mail a notice to property owners when proposing a tax increase.
The measure, introduced by the committee for further consideration, would require the mailed notice and the newspaper notice to identify the proposed tax increase and provide information about the public hearing at which the budget and tax proposal would be discussed. Cannon said the proposal is intended to make it easier for property owners to see, "in black and white," how a proposed budget compares to the prior year and what the change would mean for an individual taxpayer.
Cannon described the proposal as a transparency measure and said it would be "apples to apples" when comparing prior and proposed budgets. He told the committee the provision would not apply to taxing districts whose budgets are under $1 million, and it would exclude annexation and new construction when calculating whether a proposed budget constitutes a tax increase.
Several representatives asked questions at the introduction. Representative Cheatham said she was "a little bit confused" because many jurisdictions have moved to online publication to lower costs, and she asked whether the bill would require newspaper publication rather than allowing online notice. Cannon replied, "this bill is not trying to address or take sides in terms of the debate between online notice and newspaper notice," and said the bill's intent is to increase transparency for property owners.
Cheatham also said she had checked the city of Pocatello's schedule of notifications and described a timeline she said could present practical difficulties for meeting the RS's notice schedule: she cited April 25 as the date the budget hearing must be published this year, a final budget publication on June 12, a public hearing set for Aug. 7, the city's requirement to send the budget to the county by Sept. 2, the county's return of the finalized budget by Sept. 9, and levy certification on Sept. 5. Cannon responded that the committee was only being asked to introduce the RS and that timing concerns could be addressed during a full hearing.
Representative Birch asked whether the mailed and published notices could include narrative explanations in addition to dollar amounts; Cannon said the proposal "requires certain information and then leaves the door open" and does not prohibit an explanatory statement. Representative Bruce, who moved to introduce the RS, said he supports the measure because public hearings often draw no attendees and mailed notice could increase participation.
The motion to introduce RS 32,605 carried after a voice vote; Representative Cheatham asked to be recorded as opposed. No second was recorded on the transcript. The committee will consider the RS at a full hearing; Cannon said the full hearing would allow the committee to explore timelines and other implementation questions.
The committee adjourned and said it will meet again tomorrow at 9 a.m.
