Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Bill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Grand County assessor, treasurer warn proposed vacancy/mill-levy bill would create complexity and costs
Summary
Assessor Larry Banman and Treasurer Marcy Wheatley told commissioners a draft state bill that would let local governments set higher mill levies on some vacant land could force costly software changes, create opaque tax accounting and shift tax burdens; the board discussed next steps and potential opposition through county associations.
Grand County Assessor Larry Banman and Treasurer Marcy Wheatley briefed the Board of County Commissioners on a state measure the presenters described in the meeting as "House Bill" (as cited in the board packet). Banman said the bill would allow municipalities, counties and many special districts to impose higher mill levies on certain vacant land than on improved parcels. He and Wheatley argued that the change would produce complicated assessment math, new accounts and special carve-outs for exempt entities (for example, certain agricultural land and school districts). Banman and Wheatley said the change could shift tax burdens in unpredictable ways — they presented examples showing some properties could face modest increases while others could be penalized — and said software vendors report that required upgrades could cost millions for some offices.
Wheatley added that recent changes to property tax notices already have reduced clarity for taxpayers and that the bill could further reduce transparency by removing assessed-value details from front-facing notices. Commissioners pressed about whether the bill would be mandatory or optional; Banman said it would be an opt-in process that a town or district would put on a ballot for local voter approval but would also apply to some special districts if they chose to opt in. Staff and commissioners also discussed the practical challenge of implementing multiple new mill-levy accounts across an estimated 150 taxing districts and how that could create both administrative and staffing burdens.
Several commissioners called the proposal an "unfunded mandate" because local offices would need upgraded software and additional staff time to implement new assessment and tax-accounting rules. Commissioners asked the assessor and treasurer to stay engaged with stakeholder groups (County Associations, CCI, AGNC) and share modeling and local examples. Banman encouraged a unified voice from local government associations to influence the bill's sponsors and committee testimony. Commissioners agreed to track the bill and raised the option of drafting an opposition letter or comments to the finance committee when appropriate.
No formal county vote on a resolution was recorded at the meeting; board discussion focused on understanding local impacts and coordinating with statewide county and municipal associations to inform any advocacy or comment.
