Home Forums Legislation Legislation discussion

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Charlene G Randall
    Participant
    Post count: 8

    In response to Ken’s email, I choose to post here as to be respectful of his email concerns.

    Are you suggesting that our legislative committee should not actively discuss current legislation and its impact?
    Should we not point out legislation that is in direct opposition to the intent of laws such as FFOS & religious exemptions?
    Should we not question potential ethics violations.

    Would you not be concerned if legislation was introduced where as you were not allowed to assess waterfront property any higher than a forest designation?

    If we are the “experts” in our profession, do we not have an obligation to speak out? Even though we don’t have waterfront property in WG, I would be just as concerned if the State legislature was going to make Charlestown set their waterfront values at $115 per acre. Shouldn’t all assessors, not just those from communities who “chose to allow “solar farms”, with the belief it was a benefit to the community,” be concerned with legislation that says a utility can benefit from the values set for a forest designation?

    We all know that whatever is passed is what we have to uphold. I don’t think any of us needed to be reminded of that.

    Kenneth Mallette
    Participant
    Post count: 10

    For those who haven’t seen this yet. H8220 has passed and it prohibits Assessor’s from changing the land value beneath solar arrays.

    Charlene G Randall
    Participant
    Post count: 8

    In speaking with a few Senators this morning, there was an amendment (that was voted down) to raise the $5 per KW to $9. In the hearing, it was stated that they would revisit that in January.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.