Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Of Equalization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Equalization reinstates green‑belt valuation for Hausman Development after appeal
Summary
The Lancaster County Board of Equalization approved an appeal by Hausman Development to reinstate a special green‑belt (ag) valuation after a follow‑up assessor inspection observed agricultural use; the board also accepted preliminary recommendations on 4‑51 tax exemption applications and approved motor vehicle tax exemptions with no public comment.
The Lancaster County Board of Equalization on Feb. 17 approved an appeal by Hausman Development to reinstate a special green‑belt valuation for a contested parcel after the assessor’s office reported observers subsequently verified agricultural use.
Abby Stark, associate counsel for Hausman Development, told the board the parcel’s north portion is actively planted and harvested while the south portion includes a pond and fallow area. "We have invoices from planting, harvesting, fertilizing," Stark said and offered recent photos showing harvested corn stalks. She asked the board to reverse a denial of green‑belt status.
Jacob Van Pelt of the Assessor’s Office said his staff met with the property owner, returned for a more detailed inspection after the appeal and observed agricultural use. "After that inspection, ag use was present and observed, and it is our recommendation to reinstate the ag belt or the green belt status on this parcel," Van Pelt said. A commissioner moved to approve the appeal; following a second the board voted in favor and reinstated the valuation.
Earlier in the BOE portion of the meeting, Van Pelt presented preliminary recommendations on timely‑filed 4‑51 tax exemption (451) applications. He said the lists were informational and final recommendations would be provided to the board in May (estimated around May 19). The board accepted the preliminary recommendations as part of the record.
The BOE opened a public hearing on motor vehicle tax exemption applications for several institutions, received no public comment, and then approved the applications by roll call. The board adjourned after taking those actions.
The BOE’s decisions were procedural and administrative: the Hausman appeal was resolved in favor of the appellant based on additional inspection findings, and other tax‑exemption matters were advanced or finalized as noted.
