Local (Mineral Co)
New tax rates appear high, says assessor
By Leila Summers
Mineral Independent
Nov 5, 2005, 12:29

Anthony Francesconi understands if Montana taxes can be difficult for people to interpret. Even he, the Mineral County Assessor, has questions about the 2005-2006 property tax rates mailed recently to county patrons.

Francesconi said the new tax rates appear surprisingly high — considering his office assessed more than $15 million in new taxable market values this year alone.

Such a boom should minimize tax increases caused by voter-approved levies within the county, he said.

But when Francesconi looks at projected taxes for county districts, a break just doesn’t appear to be there, he said.

“Generally when you think of more money to draw from, you don’t need to take out a higher rate,” Francesconi said.

Some districts, he said, appear to increase taxes up to approximately $150 per $100,000 of taxable assessed property value; and all districts show rates increased to at least $78 per $100,000.

“We expected it to increase some, but not to this point,” said Francesconi, who had anticipated rates in the neighborhood of $50 per $100,000 of taxable assessed property value in most districts.

Montana property tax rates are determined by a citizen’s property value, which are processed through a state-set formula to determine homestead exemptions, legislated tax rates and mileage rates.

Mineral County Commissioner Judy Stang said the tax increases appear to be from a county-wide hospital levy approved by voters this spring and additional city and school levies and bonds okayed by various districts.

Stang said new property value assessments — such as the $15 million increase of this year — get phased into the county’s tax roll during an eight year time period, as state statute requires. This year, the county received only $371,000 of market valuation, she said.
The theory behind “phasing in” property taxes, Stang said, is to not overburden a taxpayer all at once with a property tax increase.

“It’s difficult to pay increased taxes,” she said. “The theory is to have as minimal impact on people as possible. . . it would be too much of a burden to pay it all at once.”

Stang said this year’s property tax increase could be the tip of a much larger iceberg. In 2008, Stang said current property value phase-ins will be completed.

“It’s going to be scary in 2008 when entire phase-ins take place,” she said. By then, Stang said a current $100,000 home could increase to $300,000 in value.

Francesconi agreed local people could be hit hardest with future property value and tax increases. Many properties Francesconi’s office assessed this year have been second homes for people with pocketbooks able to afford anticipated tax hikes, he said.

Other people might have to seek property tax reduced-payment programs, Francesconi said. His office has information about tax reductions and rebates available to low-income, disabled veterans and elderly citizens in the county, he said.

Stang said most of the money collected through taxes is received at the state level; the county only absorbs about 25 percent of a person’s total tax bill.

“We mainly collect for the state,” she said.