Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the LB 683 topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Proposal LB 683 would replace ‘pink postcards’ with June notices showing valuations and hearing times

State Legislature · March 21, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

LB 683, discussed in revenue committee hearings, would replace the traditional late-summer pink postcard with a June notice displaying current and prior-year tax valuations, hearing times for each taxing entity, and an explanation distinguishing valuation protests from budget input.

During revenue committee hearings described by Presenter (S1), lawmakers reviewed a proposal, LB 683, to change how counties notify property owners about tax requests.

Under the bill as summarized in the transcript, LB 683 would replace the pink postcard currently sent late in the process with a notice mailed in June that shows the current and prior years' tax valuations for a property, lists the time of each taxing entity’s joint public hearing, and explains the distinction between protesting a property’s valuation and providing input on a taxing entity’s budget. Presenter (S1) said the committee recognized the current postcard process as not timely and asked several questions about giving taxpayers more timely information on how their taxes are determined.

Other related measures remain under consideration: one bill would change the hearing date from September to July, and another would remove community colleges from the postcard because community colleges no longer levy property taxes. The revenue committee sent a separate postcard-related bill to the floor and advanced discussion on LB 384, an attendance requirement bill that was amended to require one voting member at the joint hearing rather than a majority, Presenter (S1) said.

The transcript does not record sponsors, vote counts, or an enacted text for LB 683; the changes described here reflect the committee’s summary as presented by Presenter (S1).