Agenda - 08-17-1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

I { Mr. Jim Polatty Page 2 May 30, 1982 reduction for Cass D farms is incorporated into state legislation establishing this classification and tax system for all 100 counties, those features of thelprogram would be invalid. Of course, these considerations would not affec the program if the proposed tax reductions were eliminated from it; howevei, this additional tax relief seems to be an essential ingredient of t'he program. In a similar vein, Article VI, § 20 of the Constitution may be teed to imply that any provision in your proposed ordinance for assessing attorneys' fees against the plaintiff in a "frivilous" nuisance action would also have to be based on uniform enabling legislation of state-wide applicability and could not be grounded solely on a local act. Special Assessment Exemptions As Dave l,alp*rence indicates in his memo, exemptions for certain classes of farm owners from utility extension assessments may not be granted under current state legislation. However, if the law were to be changed, local rather than eta a-wide legislation would suffice. Lawrence suggests several forms such local legislation could take. Perhaps the most direct course would be to exempt spbcifically qualifying farmland from assessments until connections are! made to service the property. That arrangement is what appears to be s' ggested in Section 2.2(b) in the ordinance. The local lee elation could be linked to G.S. 160A-220, 153A-188, and tq 162A-6. The Orange, County proposal, however, may suggest that what is envisioned here is a somewhat more complicated system of assessments. At the top of the second page of questions to us there is a suggestion that the assessing agency distinguish betWaen "land surrounding the home" and the rest of the property _ for assessment purposes. The implication seems to be that even after a farm house is ..connec.ted"-to a utility line, the assessment is reduced below the amount that wo d ordinarily apply to the entire farm property. This idea is not fully deve*ped. If the assessing body is expected to allocate the assessment to only a portion of the property, then the draft should spell out how this is to be accomplished. Perhaps the same result may be accomplished by prohibiting the assessing body from using lot area or front footage as the assessment basis and requiring it to use a basis more consistent with farm preservation purposes. These concepts in your draft need further refinement. Eminent Domain (Article 2, Section 2.3(3)) The 0rang County proposal grants the Commissioner of Agriculture the power to veto qhe acquisition by eminent domain of Class B, C, and D farm lands by various condemnors. As Lawrence points out, either state-wide or local legislation would be necessary to establish the special procedures that are outlined. 'Several of us doubt the political viability of such a proposal. Green points o t that a comprehensive revision of the state eminent domain law (Chapter 40A of the General Statutes) was just completed last year and the General Assembly may not be eager to begin rewriting or making exceptions to it right away. Heath points out that the condemnation of land by a local unit _