Table of Contents
Do not index
Do not index
Read/view the article at KTVH by Jonathon Ambarian
Excerpt:
“The attorney general’s office said the limit on property valuations and the overall cap on property taxes are related, but that their vastly different fiscal impacts point to them not being closely related enough to count as a single subject. In a legal brief to the Montana Supreme Court, they argued the proposal should instead be submitted as multiple separate initiatives.
“For example, a citizen could reasonably decide to limit the State’s ability to increase property values by more than 2% per appraisal cycle, but not support a 1% tax cap that results in a revenue loss to their local school district, county, and rural fire district,” they said. “Those present distinct political decisions for citizens.”
Knudsen’s office also said the language of the measure needed clearer definitions for terms like “real property” and “significantly improved,” and that it wasn’t clear whether “special assessments” would count against the tax cap.”