Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Assessments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee shortens notice period and clarifies posting for property revaluations in amended bill
Summary
Committee amended a bill to cut the public-notice period from 90 to 45 days for certain property-valuation notifications and to require posting on municipal websites or social media plus usual local posting; the amendment passed and the bill was advanced and placed on consent.
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Assessments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Bill 225 (filed as 02/25 in committee) was the subject of detailed committee drafting about public-notice timing and where municipalities must post information about revaluations and changes to assessed values.
Committee members proposed and adopted amendments to shorten a 90-day notice period to 45 days in two places in the bill and to change posting language so municipalities must post notice on their website or social media and in the customary local physical notice locations. A senator also requested adding the phrase "and public notice" after municipality to preserve traditional physical notice locations.
The sponsor and committee discussed that assessors and municipal staff had recommended the shorter 45-day window to accommodate administrative workloads; the chair said the change would address assessor and county-services conversations. Committee members also raised drafting clarifications about whether the bill required separate postings in multiple places; the adopted amendment clarified the digital-or-physical posting approach.
A motion of OTP was moved by Senator Lang and seconded; a further amendment to change the 90-day periods to 45 days and adjust posting language was moved and seconded, carried by voice vote, and the bill as amended was approved in committee and put on the consent calendar. The transcript records that Senator Long would take the bill off consent for follow-up action.
The committee discussion also included clarification that the statutory baseline already requires two physical meeting-posting locations and that the new language aimed to add a digital posting requirement in addition to the existing physical postings.

