Committee considers overhaul of agricultural property classification and review process

2251031 · February 7, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
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

Representative Esman opened a hearing on House Bill 27, a Department of Revenue working-group recommendation to revise agricultural property classification rules and related review and application processes.

Representative Esman opened the hearing on House Bill 27 and told the House Taxation Committee that the bill would generally revise eligibility for classification of property as agricultural for property valuation purposes. Esman said HB 27 was a recommendation from the Department of Revenue’s Land Classification Working Group and characterized it as a "simple cleanup bill."

Esman told the committee the working group included representatives from agriculture, development, and local and state government and that the group was tasked with establishing fair taxation of raw and undeveloped land. He said the group concluded statutory language should prioritize preferential classification for "bona fide" agricultural property and incentivize landowners to keep land in bona fide agricultural use.

Representative Esman summarized provisions included in the bill as described in the short title: an application process for agricultural property, a review process for properties classified as agricultural, revised income requirements for certain property to qualify as agricultural, removal of the "nonqualified agricultural property" classification, the creation of an "idle land" property classification and tax rate, and a realty-transfer requirement (text in committee summary truncated in the hearing record).

The sponsor described the measure as intended to correct statutory language and clarify legislative intent after the interim working group review. The committee did not record a vote during the opening; the hearing proceeded with instructions about testimony length and participation. No formal action or vote on HB 27 was taken in the portion of the hearing captured by the transcript.

Ending: The hearing on HB 27 was opened and initial sponsor remarks were heard; committee discussion and public testimony were scheduled to follow but are not included in the provided transcript excerpt.