Commission reviews county property-tax waiver policy after state statute change; staff to draft tighter rules

Thomas Henry, assistant county counselor, briefed the commission on state statute KSA 79-1613 and Sedgwick County Policy 2.304, which govern property tax abatements or credits for buildings destroyed or substantially damaged by events such as fires, floods or disasters.

“KSA 79 dash 1 6 1 3, it allows the county commissioners in the state to provide either property tax abatement or a credit towards, if you've already paid your property taxes for towards future years of property tax, taxes owed,” Thomas Henry said, summarizing the statute and emphasizing that the authority is permissive, not mandatory. Henry explained the statute’s eligibility rules and timing constraints and noted that the statute was amended in 2022 to broaden eligibility beyond homesteads.

Henry said qualifying events must be an event such as an earthquake, flood, tornado, fire, storm or any event declared a disaster by the state of Kansas and that the statute defines a building as “substantially destroyed” when the cost to repair exceeds 50 percent of the building’s pre-incident market value. He identified timing constraints: abatements or credits can be applied for destruction that occurs between January 1 and August 15 in a tax year (allowing abatement or credit toward unpaid taxes); destruction after August 15 can only be addressed with a credit toward future years. He also said taxpayers have until Dec. 20 of the year following the incident to file an application.

Henry told the commission that county policy 2.304 predates the 2022 statute change and had been focused on homesteads and natural disasters; the 2022 change and a Property Valuation Division opinion create ambiguity, because the broader statutory language could be read to allow commercial and industrial properties to qualify. Henry presented options: keep the policy limited to homesteads and declared natural disasters, expand eligibility to all buildings, or stop approving applications entirely. Henry also recommended keeping a policy exception to avoid severe tax-base impacts in small jurisdictions.

Clerk Kelly Arnold said the program is not actively advertised but noted procedures the county follows when an application is received. “It's not something that's out there that's really public. We haven't promoted it, but it's something that's been available,” Arnold said. She added that when the county receives an application staff notifies the other taxing jurisdictions so they may comment at the commission meeting.

County Counselor Justin Wagner said that historically MABCD staff (building/demolition permitting) had informed property owners about the option in some cases, and he suggested that outreach could be formalized so eligible taxpayers are aware of the program when they seek demolition permits.

Several commissioners said they prefer narrowing the county policy to its original intent. Commonly expressed positions were to limit relief to owner-occupied homesteads (not landlords), allow relief only for natural disasters declared by the county or state, apply relief only to the county portion of taxes while notifying other taxing entities, and prorate the relief for the portion of the year the property was unusable. Commissioners also asked staff to develop a draft policy amendment and recommended that staff filter applications and bring only qualifying cases to the board for action.

Next steps: staff will prepare a draft revision of Policy 2.304 reflecting the commission’s direction for public discussion and formal action at a future meeting. Staff also said they will propose outreach and application-handling procedures so affected taxpayers are notified through permitting and clerk processes.