A free-market think tank is urging state lawmakers to get tough about holding local governments accountable for complying with a state law requiring them to vote whenever they accept extra revenues coming from increased property values.
The Kansas Policy Institute is backing a bill allowing taxpayers to file complaints against local governments that don’t comply with a 2021 law requiring more public disclosure when local governments collect extra tax dollars from rising property values.
“There are circumstances where they may just not follow the process, and people ought to have a chance to call them on it,” said Dave Trabert, the group’s chief executive.
“Generally speaking, I do not think people were trying to skirt the law,” Trabert said in an interview after the Senate tax committee held a hearing on the bill Wednesday.
“There are a lot of different moving parts to this,” Trabert said.
“There are a lot of things they need to do according to law, so there should be a process given that government generally has a habit of not following the law.”
The law was seen as a way of ending the longstanding practice of local governments collecting extra revenue without raising the property tax rate.
State lawmakers have long complained that local governments claim they are not raising property tax rates while collecting more money from increased property values.
Under the law passed last year, the property tax rate for local governments is to be adjusted to bring in the same amount of revenue as it did the year before – otherwise known as the “revenue neutral rate.”
A vote and public hearing would be required to take in more money. Local governments are required to publish notice of their intent to take in extra revenues that either come from a tax increase or from a so-called windfall that could come with increased property values.
The legislation tightens up the law so taxpayers can file a complaint with the Board of Tax Appeals to determine if the local government isn’t adhering to the “neutral rate” requirements and whether a reduction or refund is warranted.
The bill requires local governments to adopt a resolution or ordinance where they acknowledge that they will take in more money in the new budget year than the last one even if the property tax rate remains the same.
The local government must approve a revenue increase with a roll-call vote.
The name and vote of each member of the governing body, the adopted budget, budget certificate and other budget forms must be filed with the county clerk and the Department of Administration so it can be posted on the state agency’s website.
The legislation raised concerns with city leaders, who are afraid that the bill, as now written, would invite complaints from across Kansas.
They suggested limiting complaints only to taxpayers who live within that taxing jurisdiction.
“The city believes it is bad public policy to allow taxpayers who are not affected by a property tax levy the opportunity to challenge it,” the city of Overland Park told the Senate tax committee in written testimony.
“Such challenges are better left to those businesses and residents who bear the burden of the property tax levy and are recipients of the essential public services it pays for,” the city said in its testimony.
The city of Prairie Village also weighed in against the bill.
“Our locally elected officials take transparency seriously and we always welcome opportunities where we can be even more transparent,” the city’s lobbyist, Stuart Little, said in written testimony.
“We believe there may be some other solutions to improve the process beside the proposed provisions in (the bill) as it’s currently written,” Little said.
The Kansas County Commissioners Association said the bill showed “mistrust of local elected officials and assumes they aren’t doing what is in the best interest of their local communities.”
The bill had the support of the Kansas Chamber of Commerce.
“Posting approved budgets. Posting the roll-call votes. Formalizing a complaint process for taxpayers.
“These all seem like reasonable modification to that law,” said chamber lobbyist Eric Stafford.
“The complaints will increase, but at least there’s now transparency and a process of how local units of government will handle property tax increases.”
