Assessors discuss conservation exemptions

Madison County appraiser Stacey Rubio placed a stack of conservation use applications on the board of assessors’ table June 18, offering recommendations on what should qualify and what shouldn’t.

While the group discussed specific tracts, the talk also touched on the BOA’s overall perspective on conservation exemptions, with opinions varying on how stringent the group should be on the tax break.

There are 2,000 parcels and 76,855 acres in Madison County that have conservation use status, meaning the owners of those properties pay substantially less in taxes than others.

The conservation exemption was established by the state government, allowing farmers to maintain big tracts of land for agricultural purposes without being crippled by property taxes.

However, many complain that the conservation use exemption is abused by property owners who simply seek a tax break and have no intention of doing anything productive with their land.

Madison County commissioners addressed the abuse of the exemption in December, setting a 10-acre minimum for conservation use tax breaks in the county. Under the new guidelines, property owners seeking first-time conservation use status must have at least 10 acres of land to be considered. However, the 10-acre minimum won’t affect property owners with less than 10 acres, who currently enjoy the exemption, until 2012.

On June 18, Rubio made recommendations of approval or denial on a thick stack of conservation use applications. She informed the board that she had traveled to the properties in question and that the stack of papers represented about two days of work.

The BOA approved most of Rubio’s recommendations, but agreed to further discussion of three applications. Among those was a request for conservation status on a tract greater than 10 acres, where the property owner had no fencing, livestock, timber plan or hay or crop production.

Rubio said the applicant admitted that he is basically “growing kudzu” on the property. She recommended denial of the conservation application.

However, BOA member Larry Stewart pointed out that denying the request would not be in line with how conservation applications have been evaluated in recent years. He recalled the approval of a conservation application for a property owner who had 20 acres of pasture covered up with thistle weed, an invasive plant incompatible with cattle production.

“We have not used this criteria in the past,” said Stewart, regarding the proposed rejection of the kudzu-covered property.
New chief appraiser Robin Baker responded that “two wrongs don’t make a right.”

“Well, if you haven’t you need to start now,” he said.

Stewart and Jim Escoe voted in favor of the conservation use application, while Samantha Garland and David Ragland voted against it. With the 2-2 split, the board agreed to discuss the application at its next meeting. Another conservation use application also received a split vote and will be considered later, while a third application discussed Thursday, in which a small portion of a 10-acre tract is used for hay production, was approved by a 3-1 vote, despite Rubio’s recommended denial. Garland provided the lone vote in support of Rubio’s recommendation.