Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers consider changing timing and producer of property‑tax ‘pink postcard’ notice
Summary
LB683 would have the state produce and deliver an expanded property‑tax notice on or before June 1 to give taxpayers earlier, clearer information about valuations and the timing of local budget hearings; proponents argued the change increases timely public engagement, opponents urged keeping the current postcard and joint‑public‑hearing process.
Senator Jane Raybould (LD 28) introduced LB683 on behalf of the Nebraska Association of County Officials (NACO), proposing that the state produce and distribute a revised property‑tax notice earlier in the year so that taxpayers receive valuation information and the dates of local budget hearings on or before June 1, rather than the current late‑summer postcard process.
Sponsor and proponent testimony said the change is intended to put information in front of taxpayers when local budget hearings still can influence levy decisions. John Cannon (NACO) and county assessors testified that valuations are already communicated by a notice of valuation change on or before June 1 and argued sending a broader notice to all property owners at that time — including the time and place of each taxing subdivision’s budget hearing — would help citizens participate in budget decisions rather than discover tax increases after budgets are finalized.
Proponents provided sample postcard language and a calendar of statutory dates that they said would make it clearer where taxpayers should raise objections about valuations (protest to county) versus where they should attend hearings about the overall tax request (city/school/county budget hearings). County assessors said the June 1 deadline aligns with their existing valuation notices and would let taxpayers use the 30‑day protest window while also attending the budget hearings that determine tax askings.
Opponents and neutral witnesses raised concerns that replacing the current Property Tax Request Act ("pink postcard" and joint public hearing process enacted as LB644 in 2021) could reduce a successful, direct notification mechanism that prompted public attendance at evening joint hearings and that a state‑produced notice should not eliminate the statutory postcard or the joint public hearing requirement. The Platte Institute testified oppositionally, urging retention of the direct postcard and joint public hearing while supporting earlier or supplemental notification of budget hearings.
Fiscal and administrative concerns: county witnesses noted mailing costs vary by year because current notices go to parcels whose valuations changed; a full statewide mailing to all parcels could create new cost for counties or state agencies to absorb. County and municipal trade groups asked the committee to weigh whether the state should produce the mailing (and incur associated costs) or retain county responsibility.
Ending: Sponsor Raybould and proponent organizations said the proposal would refine the existing system to improve timely citizen engagement; opponents asked that the proposal not replace the existing statutory postcard and joint public hearing mechanism without further safeguards. No committee vote occurred at the hearing.
