So here’s the deal, says the Brown County Commission to ag-landowners in the fifteen southern, most fertile townships of our fair county. We overtaxed your land by 18%. We’ll give you a refund on your 2017 taxes payable this year equal to the amount over-assessed in 2017 if you sign a release promising not to sue for any refunds from the previous years when the county over-taxed you.
How much did the county over-tax those landowners? About one million dollars extra each year for five years, said former equalization chief Michael Hauke, Jr., in January, shortly after the Brown County Commission fired him.
How much is the county offering to get landowners to settle? A tenth of that:
County commissioners allotted $513,411 for property owners in 15 southern townships who have paid more than their share.
The ag land in those townships totals 381,420 acres, said Gene Loeschke, interim director of equalization. So the average refund per acre is $1.35.
…Chris White, state’s attorney, said the total approved was verified by the treasurer’s office, auditor’s office, director of equalization’s office and the state Department of Revenue as the county’s share of 2017 overtaxation of ag land in the 15 townships [Shannon Marvel, “County’s Refund Offer Averages $1.35 per Acre for Overtaxed Ag Land,” Aberdeen American News, 2018.05.02].
Brown County’s offer to pay its share of the over-tax could make the city, school districts, and other taxing subdivisions a bit nervous; after all, if the county is willing to pay back its portion of the mistake, shouldn’t the other taxing entities show the same courtesy to their taxpayers? But the city and schools should watch Brown County’s attempt to get the state to shoulder some of the refund bill:
The county plans to send a letter to Andy Gerlach, secretary for the state Department of Revenue, requesting that the state share the cost of the settlement. Whether that will work is still unknown.
[Brown County Commission chair Doug] Fjeldheim noted the state had approved the county’s ag assessment plan each year, which included the use of neighborhoods based, in part, on sales, since 2010 [Marvel, 2018.05.02].
Expect the state to fight that logic hard. But if that logic holds, if the state really bears some responsibility for the refunds Brown County is offering, the city, schools, and other subdivisions affected could turn that logic around on the county. The Aberedeen Central School, for instance, could say, “Wait a minute—we did nothing wrong. We didn’t have any hand in the assessment. The county messed that up. We simply set legal levees based on the numbers the county approved and handed to us. If we owe any refunds, the county should pick them up, too.”
The county continues to maintain the position that since hardly anyone challenged their assessments in previous years, before Hauke’s revelation of the misassessment, Brown County has no obligation to refund the over-tax from previous years. The county may be technically, legally correct, but I find it… surprising that government can make an error this big yet evade any responsibility for that error by blaming citizens for not recognizing a violation of the state’s complex-to-impenetrable ag land assessment formula (shades of the Vogons posting notice of the destruction of Earth at Alpha Centauri).
Just curious, farmers: wouldn’t it be easier to make sure the county is taxing you the right rate if we just used a straightforward income tax instead of an arcane formula based on how much income everyone else in the neighborhood made on similar land over the past several years?
It’s only right … because if Brown County undercharged the farmers they’d only want a tenth of it paid back.
So maybe, people knew and fired the guy who exposed the fraud thinking the issue would go away if he did. I think someone has some explaining to do. Did he get a termination deal to which anyone is privy?
Francis, I think if there were a termination deal, Hauke wouldn’t have spoken to the press.