Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Property Taxes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents voice widespread concern about rising home valuations, high property taxes and TIF at Douglas County hearing
Summary
More than two dozen residents spoke during the public comment period, citing steep valuation increases, calls for levy reductions, TIF transparency, and criticism of Omaha Public Schools' performance; speakers included seniors on fixed incomes and younger residents concerned about affordability and migration.
A large portion of the joint public hearing was taken up by public comment, during which residents repeatedly raised concerns about rising assessed valuations, higher property tax bills, perceived tax‑increment financing (TIF) impacts, and public school performance.
Speakers described personal financial strain and urged elected officials to reduce levies or find cuts. Steve Edgerton, who identified himself as retired, said, “My taxes have doubled in 5 years,” and described fixed‑income challenges. Several other speakers described valuation or tax bill increases they called dramatic: one speaker said assessed values rose 25% for their property this year and another said a valuation jump added more than $90,000 in assessed value in a single year.
Commenters raised TIF and reporting transparency. A speaker who said he represented research from the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy urged jurisdictions to publish GASB 77 disclosures and itemize tax increment financing impacts so the public can see how abatements affect taxing entities' revenue. Another commenter asked whether tax revenue returning to the rolls as TIF obligations mature will be used to lower levies.
Several speakers focused on Omaha Public Schools (OPS). Melissa Hill told the dais, “Shame on you,” and criticized OPS leadership and outcomes; Sofia May said low proficiency rates and high taxes are forcing young people out of Nebraska. Other speakers called for fiscal restraint, suggested exploring alternatives such as sales tax, and promoted ballot initiatives to cap valuation increases or reduce property taxes.
County staff acknowledged the hearing rules and offered follow‑up options — interpreters and office contacts — for speakers who needed assistance. The county clerk reminded attendees that the hearing was not an opportunity to contest 2025 valuations (those deadlines had passed) but that the county provided a handout with 2026 valuation appeal dates and homestead exemption information.
