The committee examined several proposed changes affecting current‑use enrollment, land‑use change tax valuations, and the appeals process. Kirby Keating explained that one provision clarifies how grazing rights and sales of farm products (including per‑head grazing payments) can count toward the gross income test for current‑use eligibility; qualifying entries may require written leases or multi‑year receipts.

Keating also explained amendments to the land‑use change tax administration. Under the draft language, a municipality would have 30 days to establish fair‑market value for withdrawn or developed current‑use land; if the municipality fails to act, the Department of Property Valuation and Review (PVR/PBR) would have 30 days to set the value (creating a possible 60‑day total). Keating said the owner would then have 30 days to appeal the determination to either the municipality or the director as provided by statute. He noted that a portion of land‑use change tax revenue is distributed (three‑quarters to the education fund and one‑quarter to the general fund) and that municipalities currently keep up to $2,000 if they perform the valuation; the bill would deny that municipal share to towns when PVR performs the valuation because the town did not act timely.

Committee members voiced concern about the administrative workload for towns that may still need to process appeals or answer questions without receiving the $2,000 payment. One member asked how many properties would be affected annually; Keating said that is a question for Department of Taxes and asked the committee to invite municipal representatives (LCT) and PVR staff to testify. No formal votes were taken; committee staff said they will schedule follow‑up testimony before considering section votes.