Laserfiche WebLink
44 <br /> <br />A RESOLUTION URGING GREATER STATE ASSISTANCE TO HELP THE COUNTIES IN <br />DEFENDING LEGAL. CHALLENGES TO THE PROPERTY TAX <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, the major railroads in North Carolina brought a lawsuit in <br />federal district court, against Secretary of Revenue Mark Lynch and <br />Ad Valorem Tax Division Director Doug Holbrook, challenging the level of <br />taxation of their property in 87 counties in relation to all other <br />property in each jurisdiction for the 1980 tax year; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, the trial court rendered a decision in that case adverse <br />to the defendants and the several counties on two main legal points, and <br />although the intent of the lawsuit was to correct an inequity in the <br />property tax treatment of railroads, the effect of the decision from the <br />county government viewpoint has been to create another inequity by placing <br />the railroads in an unwarranted favored tax status; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, other annually assessed property taxpayers are likely to <br />consider similar legal challenges, and the effect could be to place an <br />inequitable, disproportionate tax burden on residential real property <br />taxpayers; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, most counties affected by the 1980 lawsuit faced a potentially <br />small tax revenue loss compared to the legal expense of individually defending <br />the suit; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, only Mecklenburg and Madison Counties directly intervened <br />in the lawsuit, but the several counties, though not joined as defendants, <br />collectively raised in excess of $46,000 to hire outside legal counsel <br />to assure that the counties collective concerns were at least addressed; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, the Attorney General's office has assigned one of its Assistant <br />Attorney Generals in the Revenue Section to represent state-level defendants, <br />but because of his many other duties and responsibilities he has been able <br />to devote only a portion of his time to the railroad lawsuit; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, state law governs the administration of the property tax, <br />including the requirement for an octennial revaluation cycle for real <br />property; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, a legislative study committee is looking at the feasibility <br />of requiring more frequent revaluations and county officials generally <br />support this effort, but any legislative solution to the problem will take <br />many years to implement fully because of the financial expense, <br />technological improvements, and increased qualified personnel that will <br />be necessary to assure accurate revaluations on a more frequent basis, <br />and in the meantime other lawsuits may be brought by annually assessed <br />property taxpayers; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, the property tax has been and continues to be the major <br />revenue source for local governments in North Carolina; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, it would appear to be in the best interest of State govern- <br />ment to assure the continued vitality of the property tax as a major <br />revenue source for local government, and such continued vitality is <br />contingent in part on continued equitable treatment between taxpayers <br />of different types of property such as between railroad property and <br />residential real property; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, it is far more cost effective and efficient for the State to <br />provide sufficient resources and manpower to finance and coordinate the <br />legal defense of challenges to the property tax; <br /> <br /> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the North Carolina County Attorneys' <br />Association respectfully urges Governor James B. Hunt, Jr. to use his offices to <br />s~cure greater financial resources either to be made available to aid the <br />Attorney General's office in providing a coordinated legal defense or to <br />pay outside legal counsel to provide such defense, both for the appeal stage <br />of the railroads' 1980 tax year lawsuJ~and for similar lawsuits such as the <br />railroads' 1981 tax year lawsuit and the motor freight carriers' 1980 and <br />1981 tax years' lawsuit. <br /> <br /> <br />