Tax department seeks longer appeal window and backup valuation for land-use change tax

Jill Remick, director of Property Evaluation and Review at the Tax Department, told the Ways & Means committee on Friday, April 18, that the department is proposing two procedural changes to the land‑use change tax for properties in the current‑use program: extend the taxpayer appeal window from 14 days to 30 days, and allow the department to set a value if a local lister or assessor does not return a valuation within a statutory period.

The change would not alter how the land‑use change tax is calculated, Remick said. “It’s a very minor, but we'd like to think would really be helpful,” she told the committee. The tax is imposed at 10% of the value of the land removed from current use; when only part of an enrolled parcel is withdrawn, a standalone valuation is required and the tax is 10% of that valuation.

Under current practice the department sends a valuation request to the local lister or assessor and statute provides 30 days for a response. Property owners then have 14 days to appeal the valuation to the local assessing official; Remick said that sequence causes practical problems. Because appeals often arrive at the Tax Department instead of the local assessor, the local grievance window is missed and the department must docket or deny appeals that were properly directed to the local official. Remick said about 30% of outstanding valuation requests in a recent spot check were past the 30‑day statutory response window.

Remick said the department’s priority is to give taxpayers a longer, clearer window to appeal the valuation to the local official so appeals are filed to the right forum. “Fourteen days is a very short turnaround to appeal the valuation,” she said. She proposed extending that taxpayer grievance period to 30 days. Separately, she proposed a backup process: if the department cannot secure a valuation from the local official after additional outreach and a short grace period (she suggested roughly 35 days total), the department would set a fair‑market value so it can issue the land‑use change tax bill; the taxpayer would then be able to appeal the department’s valuation and tax bill to the Tax Department.

Committee members asked procedural questions about timing and the practical workload for part‑time listers and assessors. A committee member summarized the typical sequence: the property owner contacts the Tax Department, the department notifies the town, and the town has 30 days to render a value. Remick said the department routinely follows up by email and phone when a local official misses the 30‑day window, and that allowing the department to set a value would be a last resort when the local valuation cannot be obtained in a timely way.

Committee members and staff discussed whether, if the department sets a value, that action should restart the taxpayer appeal clock and what length of time would be reasonable for taxpayers to respond to a department valuation. Remick agreed the department should return that new valuation to the taxpayer “within 30 days” and said the department’s legal team has drafted proposed statutory language that is posted on the committee page.

Remick and the committee emphasized that the suggested changes would not change the tax rate or who is eligible; they are procedural adjustments aimed at reducing confusing, misdirected appeals and delays in property transactions. The department said it prefers to receive the local valuation but wants a clear fallback so closings and development decisions are not stalled.

The Tax Department and the committee did not take formal action at the meeting; Remick said proposed language from the department’s legal team is posted to the committee page and the department will work with legislative sponsors to find a vehicle for the change.