Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Policy Rebate topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission opens public hearing on low-income property tax rebate; defers decision to Jan. 28
Summary
The board convened the statutorily required public hearing on a possible low-income property tax rebate under NMSA 7-2-14.3, heard public comment (including State Senator Debbie O’Malley), discussed TRD cost estimates and data limitations, and voted 5-0 to defer action to Jan. 28 for more analysis.
The Bernalillo County Board of Commissioners held a public hearing Jan. 14 as required by NMSA 7-2-14.3 to consider whether to adopt a low-income property tax rebate ordinance.
Deputy County Manager for Finance Shirley Reagan presented the statutory framework and data the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department provided. Under the statute, taxpayers with modified gross income of $24,000 or less who file New Mexico income tax returns are eligible for a rebate (maximum $350). TRD ran estimates using Bernalillo County’s 2023 tax-return data and returned a wide cost range: if all 65,406 eligible tax filers participated at the $350 maximum, the gross impact could reach roughly $15.6 million; more conservative participation assumptions produced much lower estimates. Staff explained the county would be billed after the state issues rebates and that the county would be responsible for rebating taxes collected for all entities for which the county collects taxes.
Senator Debbie O’Malley (appearing remotely) urged adoption and said estimates of fiscal impact are overstated; she urged attention to county reserve policy and support for low-income homeowners. Several commissioners pressed staff and TRD on data limitations: commissioners asked whether TRD can cross-reference filers’ income and homeownership to identify how many eligible households actually own property, and requested comparisons with Dona Ana County (which enacted a rebate in 2023) and other counties that have enacted rebates.
After discussion the commission voted 5-0 to defer action to its Jan. 28 meeting so staff could seek additional data (including any TRD cross-references, comparisons to Dona Ana County uptake, and other analyses) and provide follow-up for commissioners’ review. Staff noted that if an ordinance is introduced the statute allows a later mill-levy question to voters to fund the rebate; staff also recommended a one-year postponement of an ordinance’s effective date if the commission adopts it to allow time to conduct a mill-levy election.
