Conservation easement clarifications
By Mark Schiltz
Western Manager
Montana Land Reliance
Conservation easements are a hot topic. There is no shortage of opinion and some folks aren't shy about voicing those opinions. I read newspaper editorials every day and believe, without a doubt, that the editorial forum remains one of the strongest bastions of America's defense of free speech. I enjoy reading opinions reflecting philosophical beliefs or personal values, particularly when those opinions are supported with accurate facts, and the key word here, is accurate. Sometimes a letter is written and supported by inaccurate information. These letters are difficult to read, particularly when the writer concludes with statements of proclaimed truth based on the bad information. There have been a number of poorly informed comments concerning conservation easements in past letters to the editor, which has compelled me to respond and set the record straight.
Before continuing, let me introduce myself. I am the new western manager of the Montana Land Reliance (MLR), a statewide private land trust dedicated to preserving open space. My background includes 10 years of experience in the field of geology and nearly 20 years managing my family farm in Bigfork. In addition, I have worked the past 8 years for MLR as a land steward, monitoring approximately 50 conservation easements in northwestern Montana. Finally, my family, with the assistance of MLR, has permanently protected two pieces of our own property with conservation easements. These experiences will assist me in my new responsibilities as western manager which include, among other duties, both public education and outreach, as well as assisting private landowners achieve their conservation goals in planning the long term use of their property. This experience also allows me to address a couple of false claims made in past editorials.
The first false claim I'll address, is that land held under a conservation easement is taken off the tax roll, requiring the remaining land owners to make up the difference in revenue. This claim is wrong. State law, under Montana Code, 76-6-208 prohibits land held under easement from being taxed in a lower property tax classification. As a land owner with a conservation easement, I would be happy to show anyone interested, my property tax bill. I get my bill from the county department of revenue, like every other land owner, every year, and have to pay it. Now, my family's land is assessed as agricultural land, and it will stay that way. Because of the language in the easement, our land will never be subdivided and can grow any crop except a crop of houses. The county department of revenue reviews each new conservation easement and the appraised taxable value is based on the language defined in each easement. The bottom line is, my family owns land with a conservation easement and we pay property tax.
The second false claim is much more alarming and one I've heard repeated numerous times. It states that if a land trust purchases, in fee title, a piece of property which contains a conservation easement held by the land trust, the land trust can extinguish the easement and do anything with the property including subdividing it. This claim is also wrong. It's against the law and cannot happen. Last year the MLR pushed for the passage of Senate Bill No. 317. This bill, which was passed and signed into law, clarifies a land trust's relationship to property which an easement is attached, or more specifically, with respect to extinguishment of the easement on that property. Senate Bill 317 amended the Montana Code making any attempt to extinguish an easement by taking fee title to the land the easement is attached, illegal. MLR helped introduce and supported Senate Bill 317 because it strengthens and clearly defines MLR's relationship with land owners in both our efforts to protect space. A land trust is a partner with the land owner. Its job is to respect the original intentions of the land owner and insure those intentions are honored through time.
Over the years I've heard both criticism of, and acclaim for, conservation easements. In fact all conservation easements are unique and therefore like anything else, whether you're talking about doctors, teachers, or roads and bridges; there are good ones and bad ones. An easement is only as good as the words written in the recorded document. An individual can be philosophically in favor or opposed to the conservation easements, but opinions should be based on accurate facts. So in closing, when talking about conservation easements, get the facts straight. Don't criticize an easement until you've read the easement language. Ensure you make good sense by using accurate information. Call the county department of revenue for tax questions. For legal questions concerning easements, log on to www.leg.mt.gov. For any questions call The Montana Land Reliance at 837-2178.
Hope, fear, property taxes and Montanans
By Rep. Mike Jopek
In Helena, Democrats and Republicans are getting along nicely to mitigate the effects of the 2009 property tax reappraisal in a cooperative manner. The Revenue and Transportation Committee is entrusted with finding solutions for local businesses and homeowners to the property tax reappraisal. As one of the Legislators on this committee, I see folks rolling up sleeves to do the people's work with an open ear.
On our farmstead, barn cats and farm dogs sometimes fought. Likewise cynics say that it's not possible for politicians to be trusted to work on behalf of people. But Legislators, unlike farmyard pets, are coming together as people, not partisans, with a common interest in assuring that property taxes do not rise due to reappraisals. Our common bonds as Montanans are strong, a refreshing change and lesson from the bullying majority of the 2007 Montana House.
Our Constitution requires that Montana "appraise, assess and equalize the valuation of all property". The next reappraisal should be implemented in 2009. By law, every six years the Revenue Department establishes and equalizes property values.
It's understandable why homeowners and local businesses are saying that property taxes are unpredictable or too high; I agree. We are burdened by near $4 per gallon gas prices, overly high health insurance costs, skyrocketing interest debt, and home heating prices that have run amok; all causing elderly and folks to choose between gas, medicine, food or heat. Given this scenario, the people's government is an easy target; at least some of us listen and act accordingly, which is more that we can say about unregulated insurance costs or gas prices.
It's refreshing to see that there will be neighborhood modeling in the 2009 reappraisal. This will help to assure that tax valuations are equitably applied, and not by comparing "mc-mansions" to regular homes. Traditional homes should be valued next to other traditional homes.
We are beginning to see tax valuations in high growth areas slowing and even decreasing, while tax valuations in low growth areas have escalated more than expected. This is good, for tax purposes, because equalization is much easier when there are not wild differentials between the low and high growth areas of Montana. It allows for simpler and more equitable tax rate reductions and increased homestead and comstead exemptions from valuation.
We need more and better circuit breakers for anomalies in the system. Sometimes odd situations require targeted relief. There will be molding of concrete ideas in the coming days including expanded caps, and better income bracket relief.
But most exciting, is the Committee agreed to look at what other states have done in terms of reform. To model other states strategies upon Montana's system using 2003 reappraisal numbers and real, new construction growth. This is good news for many of us looking to reform property taxes of Montana homeowners and local businesses. Other States have had great successes and there is no reason why we cannot utilize these successes.
We'll see a lot more material in April, then again as the crop season advances. The Revenue and Transportation Committee meets all the way to the snow season of 2008, giving us the needed time to forge bonds and fully vet solutions to property taxes, and honor local businesses and homeowners with the deserved respect.
I've talked and listened to enough folks to know that if it looks like our optimism is too fancy, we have plenty of time to delay property tax reappraisal implementation in the 2009 session. Some may find there is no urgency or willingness to change the present tax structure and decide to pass the ball onto following session, thought the climate is right today for reforming the property tax reappraisal system.
I'll continue to work with our Governor and any willing Legislator or citizen to assure that all Montanans are fairly represented in the process. Some of our best solutions are coming from the folks back home; this work would not proceed without continued good input. Keep the ideas coming as listening is the precursor to solutions.
Only a handful of hardheads still doubt that the 2009 property tax solutions should target Montanans and not out-of-state corporations making record profit at the pumps. Democrats and Republicans can agree to do right by Montanans. Our common bond should be our farmers, local businesses and homeowners; the elderly, retirees and families striving to do right by our children.
Civility and respect go along way in politics, and hope is still stronger and more vibrant than fear. It's common values, which will reform our statewide property tax system and assure no-increases due to reappraisals.
-Rep. Mike Jopek is an independent minded farmer representing the Whitefish area in the Legislature currently as a Democrat. He serves on the Revenue and Transportation Committee charged with mitigating property tax reappraisals under HB 488 and can be emailed at mjopek@mt.gov .