Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission keeps 40-acre minimum for agricultural classification after public debate
Summary
After extensive public comment and technical staff analysis, the Lincoln County Board of Commissioners voted to retain a 40-acre minimum for agricultural tax classification rather than reducing it to 20 acres; staff warned the change could shift roughly $54 million in valuation and about $500,000 in taxes.
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Lincoln County Board of Commissioners voted Aug. 26 to keep the county’s 40-acre minimum for agricultural classification, rejecting a motion to lower the threshold to 20 acres after extended public comment and staff analysis.
Carla Gossain, director of equalization, framed the issue under South Dakota Codified Law 10‑6‑112 and described the county’s options. She told the board that moving from a 40‑acre rule to 20 acres could affect roughly 130 parcels and would shift about $54,000,000 of valuation from non‑agricultural to agricultural categories. "So there would be a value placed onto the agricultural land, but we're talking about $500,000 in taxes that would be shifted," she said, and estimated the result could mean roughly $17 to $22 per taxpayer in a worst‑case scenario on the land portion.
Supporters of a 20‑acre rule — including several members of the public and one commissioner — argued the change would recognize modern "micro‑ag" producers (apiaries, small‑scale specialty crops) and align Lincoln with the 39 counties in the state that use a 20‑acre standard. Opponents urged maintaining the status quo, citing fairness for property owners who had previously been denied classification under the 40‑acre test.
Following discussion and an alternate motion to retain 40 acres, the board approved keeping the 40‑acre minimum by roll call. Staff emphasized that the $2,500 income test remains an alternative path to qualification for smaller operators.
The action reaffirms current county practice; further appeals or clarifying ordinance language could be addressed administratively or by later board action.

