Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Bill 237 would task Revenue Interim Committee with recommending property tax rate changes; DOR urges clarity
Summary
Sen. Dave Fern and the Department of Revenue told the House Taxation Committee SB 237 would require the Revenue Interim Committee to make recommendations to the Legislature about revising property tax rates; proponents called for clearer separation of information and policy, while opponents warned a tied interim panel could deadlock.
Sen. Dave Fern (Senate District 2) told the House Taxation Committee on April 14 that Senate Bill 237 would add an explicit responsibility for the Revenue Interim Committee to make a recommendation to the next Legislature about whether to revise property tax rates. Fern said the bill would formalize the committee’s role in reviewing Department of Revenue and Legislative Fiscal Division data and producing policy-oriented recommendations rather than merely publishing tax-neutral calculations.
Danielle Pease, an attorney with the Montana Department of Revenue, urged the committee to give SB 237 a "do pass," saying DOR’s economists produce taxable-value-neutral rates as an objective calculation and that the department’s role is informational. "Tax neutral rates provided by the department are not recommendations, but rather information to better inform the legislature in deliberating on how it acts," Pease said.
Bob Story of the Montana Taxpayers Association opposed aspects of the bill, warning that an evenly numbered interim committee has produced ties on other matters and could simply decline to issue a recommendation. "The committee's deadlocked on it," Story said, arguing that requiring a recommendation could saddle the interim panel with a difficult policy duty.
Committee members pressed the sponsor about procedural questions that could arise if the interim committee is evenly numbered. Vice Chair Thane and Representative Close asked whether the bill should say the committee "shall" make a recommendation or merely "may," and Fern defended the stronger language as a way to ensure the committee examines the data rather than allowing politicization. Fern also noted the fiscal note for the bill was modest—about $2,500 in the department’s estimate—for limited travel or virtual meeting costs.
No formal action or vote on SB 237 occurred during the hearing; Fern closed by asking the committee to move the bill forward. The committee proceeded to its next scheduled hearing.
