Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Farmland Assessment Modifiers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates requiring counties to use and update farmland assessment modifiers; amendment pulled for further work
Summary
Senate Bill 2,367 would require counties to develop and use a schedule of modifiers to adjust farmland assessments; committee members debated adding an owner-application requirement and how to monitor changes, then withdrew the motion and asked for further drafting work.
Senate Bill 2,367 drew extended discussion in the Finance and Taxation Committee about whether all counties should be required to use a common schedule of assessment modifiers for farmland and how to handle changes to modifiers over time.
The bill language, as described by committee members, directs county directors of tax equalization to develop and use a schedule of modifiers to adjust farmland values. A committee member reviewed the list of modifiers currently used in some counties — including inaccessibility, irregular fields, poor drainage, rocky soils, salinity, stream overflow, erosion, flood easements, obstacles, trees, roads, brush, ponding and distance to market — and said those modifiers can either increase or decrease assessed value depending on circumstances.
Senator Wallin moved to amend the bill to require property owners to file one initial application for use of a modifier and to require owners to notify the county if a modifier’s applicability changes (for example, if land use changes from pasture to cropland or trees are removed). "I asked for the list of the 11 counties and got that," Wallin said, and then read a list of 18 counties that currently do not use modifiers.
Other members raised concerns about monitoring and enforcement if property owners must report changes. Senator Patton suggested a periodic application process might be preferable to a one-time application because owners could omit reporting improvements and thereby avoid increased assessments. Concerns included how to verify changes such as drainage improvements or remediation of saltwater spills.
Senator Marschley withdrew a second to the motion, and Wallin withdrew the motion after members said the proposal required further drafting. Members asked Wallin to work with the bill sponsor and with the Director of Equalization and the Association of Counties to craft language that addresses monitoring, enforcement and county capacity to implement the changes. No formal vote occurred on the amendment or on the bill.
