Johnson County commissioners on Thursday reviewed results from a second-year property tax relief pilot and directed staff to return to the board’s Dec. 4 agenda review with recommended options for a 2026 pilot.

The chair opened the Committee of the Whole with staff from Treasury Taxation and Vehicles and the county manager’s office to summarize the 2025 pilot, which removed an earlier $200 cap and paid roughly $184,000 in rebates in June, staff said. Tom Franzen, Treasury Taxation and Vehicles, told commissioners the program’s remaining balance after an ARPA Local Assistance and Tribal Consistency contribution is $365,590.36.

“We’re seeking direction from the board on which of these alternatives you’d like to move forward with,” Aaron Otto of the County Manager’s Office said, asking commissioners to prioritize options so staff could prepare an action item and advertising for a possible January start.

Greg Baldwin, Treasury Taxation and Vehicles, described a newly built analytics dashboard using the five‑year American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample to model eligibility by income, property value and age. Baldwin recommended asking state legislators to update statewide programs and raising the county’s average appraised-value maximum from about $384,600 to $500,000; staff estimated that change would increase payouts at least modestly, from the 2025 payout of about $184,000 to roughly $195,000 based on current usage.

Staff also presented alternatives: expanding income eligibility from HUD “very low” to “low,” which staff estimated could push payouts toward $350,000; removing the 65‑and‑older age requirement, which modeling suggested could increase payouts by about 80% (roughly $332,000); or discontinuing the pilot and reallocating the funds. Baldwin said combinations of changes could produce larger increases—for example, combining a $500,000 cap with low‑income limits and no age limit could create an estimated 1,497 eligible applicants and cost about $770,000.

Brent Christiansen, director of financial management administration, clarified the additional $93,318.43 that augmented the program balance came from the American Rescue Plan Act local assistance and tribal consistency fund and said those ARPA dollars are eligible for government services only.

Commissioners pressed staff on how eligibility was determined and how the county would handle oversubscription. Baldwin said the primary reason applicants were ineligible in 2025 was income limits (79 applicants), with fewer denials for appraised value (five) and age, residency or ownership (six). Otto said the county would report subscription data after the April 15 returns and, if applications exceeded available funds, return to the board with recommended policy options—such as first‑come, first‑served, prorated awards, or a request for additional funding—before rebates were paid.

Several commissioners favored targeting the very most vulnerable residents while preserving administrative clarity. One proposal supported by multiple commissioners was to remove the age requirement and raise the appraised‑value cap to $500,000 while keeping income limits focused on the most vulnerable (HUD very low) to keep costs closer to the current fund balance. Another group urged staff to model mixes of funding sources (including parks and recreation and library funds) to avoid committing ongoing program costs to one‑time dollars.

The board asked staff to: present a recommendation that reflects Commissioner Hanslick’s proposal (remove the age requirement and raise the $500,000 cap), include figures for using parks and recreation or other funds as part of the mix, and return to the December 4 agenda review with funding scenarios and oversubscription policy options. The item will return to the board for further action after that review.

The Committee of the Whole adjourned after the directions were given; no formal vote on program changes occurred during the session.