Taxes, home sales, election regs, offensive place names and bullying

Bills introduced to the Montana Legislature recently propose solutions to a wide range of issues, including shortening the property tax reappraisal cycle from six years to two, making home sale prices public information, amending the U.S. Constitution to limit corporate election spending, getting rid of offensive geographic names, and address bullying in public schools.

• A bill introduced by Sen. Bruce Tutvedt, R-Kalispell, that would shorten the state’s reappraisal cycle from two years from the current six years drew mixed reviews in Helena, but Tutvedt remained confident most issues can be worked out.

Tutvedt, who chairs the Senate Taxation Committee, told the committee during a Feb. 4 that property taxes generate 39 percent of the money collected by the state and are the largest source of revenue for local governments.

By revising the reappraisal system, Senate Bill 157 would simplify the state’s property tax system by ending the need for phasing in new property values, property tax rates and exemptions for residential and commercial property.

SB 157 also would create a new class for commercial land and improvements; adjust the tax rates to maintain taxable value neutrality between residential, agricultural and commercial property statewide; and revise property tax assistance programs to allow for more incremental assistance based on income.

Montana Department of Revenue director Mike Kadas, a supporter of the bill, also spoke to the committee. Other supporters included NorthWestern Energy, the State Tax Appeal Board and Montana League of Cities and Towns.

Dave McAlpin, chairman of the Tax Appeal Board, said he supported SB 157 because it would help make it easier for taxpayers to appeal their property values after reappraisal.

David Nielsen of the League of Cities and Towns said the two-year cycle would help promote tax equalization.

Opponents included the Montana Taxpayers Association, Montana Wood Products Association, Plum Creek Timber Co. and Montana Association of Realtors.

Bob Story, president of the Montana Taxpayers Association, took issue with dividing residential and commercial property into separate property classes. He said commercial property owners have always worried if they are split from residential, taxes may be raised on commercial property to the reduce taxes for residential property owners.

Julia Altemus of the Wood Products Association said the bill would negatively affect the owners of 1 million acres of forest land in Montana.

Plum Creek lobbyist Mark Baker opposed the two-year reappraisal cycle, predicting it would be a costly and inefficient use of taxes, and costly for landowners to have to file tax appeals every two years.

Joe Roberts of the Montana Association of Realtors said the group opposes changes in the property tax system until it can be shown that they are superior to the current system.

• Sen. Dick Barrett, D-Missoula, has introduced a bill that would make home sales figures public information. Currently only the Montana Department of Revenue and Realtors have access to that information.

Making the sales price information public would help homeowners make sure their appraisals and property taxes are correct, Barrett claimed.

The Montana Department of Revenue supports Senate Bill 54. Homes in Montana are appraised every six years, and Revenue Department officials said sale price information would help sellers understand why the property was appraised at the value it was given.

Realtors noted that they only use information that is six months old or newer for their appraisals and markets evaluations. Sale prices don’t reflect changes and improvements to the home over time.

SB 54 passed the Senate as amended on a third reading by 28-21 on Feb. 6 and was transmitted to the House.

• A joint resolution introduced by Rep. Ellie Hill, D-Missoula, calls for Montana to support a convention to amend the U.S. Constitution to limit corporate donations in election campaigns.

House State Administration Committee members heard House Joint Resolution 3 on Feb. 5 and did not take immediate action.

Twenty states have similar resolution proposals in their legislatures this year, and it takes 34 states to trigger a constitutional convention. Thirty-eight states would then have to approve a change for the amendment to be put into effect.

Hill said Montana voters called for such a change when they overwhelming passed a ballot initiative in 2012 declaring corporations aren’t people and money isn’t political speech. The ballot initiative came in response to the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which eased restrictions on political campaign spending by corporations.

A Montana judge struck down as unconstitutional certain provisions in the Montana ballot initiative in 2013, saying it would require elected officials to vote a certain way on corporate campaign finance issues.

In a later ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court nullified a Montana ballot initiative banning corporations from spending money in elections that was passed by voters in 1912.

Opponents to HJR 3 argued that holding a convention could leave the U.S. Constitution vulnerable to rewrites in other sections. Hill said passing the resolution might not lead to a convention if it prompts Congress to act.

• Rep. Nicholas Schwaderer, R-Superior, has introduced a bill that calls for removing the offensive words “half-breed” and “breed” from geographic place names. Schwaderer said it’s the government’s duty to remove them from the names of creeks and other places in Montana.

Halfbreed Lake National Wildlife Refuge is one of 17 places in Montana with the word “half-breed” or “breed” in the name.

House Bill 331, which would create a volunteer advisory group to determine replacement names, was introduced in the House the State Administration Committee on Feb. 5. No one spoke in opposition to the bill. The committee passed the bill by executive action by 20-0 on Feb. 6.

HB 331 also would require state and other agencies to strip the offensive words from maps, signs and markers when age or vandalism calls for an update.

Similar measures have passed elsewhere across the U.S., but the federal government outlaws only two types of place names.

The U.S. Board on Geographic Names is the interagency panel that approves all names on maps put out by federal agencies, including the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Forest Service.

The board has strict rules about changing names, but it discourages name changes unless necessary. In 1963, the board changed geographic names containing derogatory terms for black people. In 1974, the board changed all names containing a disparaging word for Japanese.

The 1999 Montana Legislature approved a bill to remove the word “squaw” from place names in the state, and all 76 places in Montana with that word have since have been changed or a change is pending.

Florida, Idaho, North Carolina, Oregon, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Minnesota, Maine and Tennessee also have removed “squaw” from place names or have passed legislation encouraging it.

• Rep. Kimberly Dudik, D-Missoula, has introduced a bill that would define bullying, prohibit it in public schools and require public school districts to adopt their own policies addressing the issue.

Members of the House Education Committee heard House Bill 284 on Feb. 4. The committee did not take action on the measure, and skeptical committee members asked whether it was necessary since a recently adopted state regulation provides similar protections.

HB 284 would explicitly define bullying as any repeated harassment, hazing or threatening online or in person. It carries the force of law, meaning parents and local authorities could go after schools and education officials who don’t comply, Dudik said.

Forty-six of the 49 states that have established bullying laws did so by 2010. Hawaii, Michigan and South Dakota were the last to make changes, leaving Montana as the only state that hasn’t addressed the issue with legislation.

Julie Hertzog, director of PACER’s National Bullying Prevention Center, said most state laws enforcing bullying definitions and procedures were enacted in the mid-2000s, with updates like cyberbullying provisions being added every year. She said the laws build better environments for kids to learn and mature in.

Anti-bully bills have been brought before the Montana Legislature five times since 2003. In 2013, Rep. Jean Price, D-Great Falls, introduced a bill similar to Dudik’s but killed it before the measure could be considered in committee. She said her bill could have impacted an anti-bullying rule that Montana Superintendent of Public Instruction Denise Juneau was in the process of enacting.

Primary opposition to anti-bullying provisions in Montana has come from Republican lawmakers concerned about local control of public schools. Most bills died in committee along party lines.

Steve Meloy of the Montana School Boards Association told the committee that anti-bullying legislation superseding the existing rule was unnecessary and may inhibit schools boards from making their own decisions.

Rep. Jeff Essmann, R-Billings, questioned whether the Montana Legislature can force a cultural change on schools. Dudik said she believes the legislature can and should spawn change to deter bullying in Montana schools by sending a message with her bill.