City, County & Local Affairs Committee- House
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (14)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1894
Act 842
· 4 mentions in chapter, transcript, agenda
Matched: “HB1894 Beaty Jr. TO ESTABLISH A METHOD OF VALUATION FOR REAL PROPE…”
|
TO ESTABLISH A METHOD OF VALUATION FOR REAL PROPERTY USED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING; AND TO … | Beaty Jr. | Notification that HB1894 is now Act 842 |
|
HB1936
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1936 R. Burkes AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ELECTION TO CE…”
|
AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ELECTION TO CERTAIN MUNICIPAL OFFICES. | R. Burkes | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1130
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TION ORDINANCE IS NOT ADOPTED; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. HB1130 Pilkington TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PERMITTING FOR RESID…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PERMITTING FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION; TO AMEND THE FAST-TRACK PERMITS ACT; … | Pilkington | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1331
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…ON, ARTICLE 16, § 5. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1331 Barnes TO REQUIRE A COUNTY TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER THE…”
|
TO REQUIRE A COUNTY TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE FOR THE … | Barnes | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1436
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…estrictions designating areas as 'Members and Staff Only'. HB1436 Steele TO PLACE LOCATION RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN FOOD PROCE…”
|
TO PLACE LOCATION RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN FOOD PROCESSING PLANTS OPERATING A SLAUGHTERHOUSE ON THE SAME … | Steele | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1448
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…ING CERTAIN PROPERTY TAX RELIEF OFFERED UNDER ARKANSAS LAW. HB1448 Puryear TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL PLANNING AREA…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING MUNICIPAL PLANNING AREAS; AND TO REQUIRE NOTICE AND COMPENSATION TO … | Puryear | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1555
Act 995
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…Painter CONCUR IN SENATE AMENDMENT Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1555 Painter TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR FILLING A VACAN…”
|
TO ESTABLISH UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR FILLING A VACANCY IN A MUNICIPAL OFFICE. | Painter | Notification that HB1555 is now Act 995 |
|
HB1565
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TERHOUSE ON THE SAME GROUNDS AS THE FOOD PROCESSING PLANTS. HB1565 R. Burkes TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DUTIES OF A COUNT…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DUTIES OF A COUNTY PROPERTY ASSESSOR; AND TO PERMIT … | R. Burkes | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1567
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…AND TO REQUIRE NOTICE AND COMPENSATION TO PROPERTY OWNERS. HB1567 McClure TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FA…”
|
TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY" RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY … | McClure | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1627
Act 877
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…PROPERTY OWNER'S INFORMATION POSTED ON AN ONLINE DATABASE. HB1627 Barnett TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PROPERTY TAX RELIEF; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PROPERTY TAX RELIEF; AND TO REQUIRE COUNTIES TO PROVIDE NOTICE … | Barnett | Notification that HB1627 is now Act 877 |
|
HB1660
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…MOTOR VEHICLE RACING FACILITY PERMITS IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS. HB1660 S. Meeks TO AMEND THE HORIZONTAL PROPERTY ACT; TO REGULATE…”
|
TO AMEND THE HORIZONTAL PROPERTY ACT; TO REGULATE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATIONS; AND TO REQUIRE AN … | S. Meeks | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1711
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…REQUIRE AN AUDIT FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATIONS. HB1711 Unger TO ALLOW A MUNICIPAL PORT AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH A PO…”
|
TO ALLOW A MUNICIPAL PORT AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH A POLICE FORCE; AND TO ESTABLISH THE … | Unger | Recommended for study in the Interim by the … |
|
HB1911
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…REAL PROPERTY UNDER ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 16, § 5. HB1911 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ASSESSMENT OF PRO…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROPERTY TAX; … | Lundstrum | Recommended for study in the Interim by the … |
|
HB1912
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…D THE LAW CONCERNING ELECTION TO CERTAIN MUNICIPAL OFFICES. HB1912 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "ASSESSED VALUE" FOR P…”
|
TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "ASSESSED VALUE" FOR PURPOSES OF THE ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY; AND … | Lundstrum | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 6, 2026
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
0:00
Chair sees a quorum. All right, committee, the only bill we're going to hear this evening, House Bill 1894. Representative Beatty, you will introduce yourself for the record.
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
0:22
You may present your bill. Representative Howard Beatty here to present House Bill 1894. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, committee, for meeting for a few minutes to go over this bill.
1894 is to establish a method of valuation for real property used for affordable housing and to establish a method of valuation for certain real property under Arkansas Constitution. Basically, let's talk about why this provision is needed. A vast majority of states have passed similar legislation to provide clarity for valuation. affordable housing and right now Arkansas has no guidance for this issue.
Assessors and taxpayers need clarification and direction on valuing this type of property. Current valuation attempts by assessors do not allow for special characteristics of affordable housing to be considered and this clarification would allow for fair valuations of affordable housing with about without applying a one-size-fits-all assumption that's there for traditional housing. Um, as far as policy provisions, uh, it provides consistent tax
treatment across senior housing, low income housing, rural housing development, or other critical housing. Uh, it would provide clear guidance to the assessors, the taxpayers and agencies on how to value unique and complex property types, such as affordable housing. this bill would give clear direction for assessors to value affordable housing consistent with its fair market value which is the same standard for all other property valuations in Arkansas and it ensures that affordable housing is treated uniformly and not burdened by unrealistic
assumptions that are there in traditional housing with that I'll entertain any questions All right. We have any questions from committee members? Seeing none, we
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
2:18
do have two people signed up to speak against the bill, Russell Hill and Lindsey French. Would you all like to come up together? All right. Yeah, why don't you do that then? Just introduce yourself for
Chair
Unverified
2:44
Hello. My name is Russell Hill. I'm the assessor for Washington County and also president of the
Lindsay Bailey
Unverified
2:52
Arkansas Assessors Association. Lindsay French, Association of Arkansas Counties. I'll go ahead and lead off. This bill does what other bills in the past have attempted to do, which is create special tax treatment for one type of special interest group, in this case low income or federally and state subsidized housing.
just because a property receives federal or state subsidies does not mean that it's entitled to special tax treatment article 16 section 5 provides that all real intangible property shall be taxed according to its value and that value ascertained in such manner as the general assembly shall direct making the same equal and uniform throughout the state no one species of property may be taxed higher than another species of property of equal value. This bill seeks to
take a certain type of housing and treat it differently just based on the fact that it receives federal and state subsidies. The same provision of the Constitution, which is actually noted in the title, Article 16, Section 5, also says that a bill of this type has to be passed by three-fourths vote of the members of each house so a three-fourths vote of the house and a three-fourths vote of the senate as is written clearly there in the title because it it does affect that section
of the constitution and the reason that is is because the founders realized that people would be coming wanting special treatment for certain certain types of properties and so to do so they've put a pretty high threshold in there for you all to vote on that and that's all I have and want to point out it's a slippery slope when one special interest group comes and gets special tax treatment there will be more to follow and with that I will pass it over to Russell on the appraisal side of
Chair
Unverified
4:55
that according to the uniform standards of professional appraisal practice it's very important that we utilize all three approaches to determining the market value of a property and then we look at those individual properties and we reconcile between those three to determine a true market value which is what the assessors are constitutionally bound to do that's our duty when we do look at low income housing we do lean towards and we do major
consideration based on their income and we utilize we do it each jurisdiction is a little bit different and we have to look at all of the information we have but we tend to lean heavily on the income approach already for these properties to make sure that they are given the correct market value for the specialized property that they are because they are different and we recognize that and therefore we adjust the values for that so it's kind of currently being done but to just reinforce what Lindsay has said I've already been in talks with storage facilities that are wanting
something similar like this they want us to only use the cost approach that makes a big difference and it doesn't represent the true market value of those particular properties and so taking away from something that has been a tried and true trade of our of our business and what we do would definitely lead to unfair and inequitable treatment all right
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
6:27
we have a couple questions representative richardson you're recognized thank you
Speaker 18
6:33
mr chair so i appreciate you guys coming down
and speaking on this bill um i just wanted to clarify a couple things that you said um and i'm sorry i missed your name russell russell russell yeah that's not your last name that's your i have two last names okay there we go well and thank you for being here i appreciate that so so first could you clarify you said that in the assessment process you treat these types of properties different at this point
Chair
Unverified
7:05
at all we take all three approaches into account uh sometimes in some counties you don't have comparable sales and you don't have enough
comparable sales to get you a true approach so you might lean a little bit more on the cost approach you still look at what sales you have but it's and you have to reconcile those three approaches to determine that market value we recognize when we're dealing with the hud property you're going to have a lower income approach and so we look we look at that approach towards
Speaker 16
7:33
that when we're determining that value of a hud property okay thank you for
Speaker 18
7:38
that and then as a follow-up um how much revenue are we talking about with these types of properties that we would be
Speaker 24
7:46
from the difference from just to kind of a round figure we're looking at 10 percent 20 percent it varies with the owner and what
Chair
Unverified
7:53
the owner thinks it is and with the assessor and what they think it does um it could be uh we've had a few with ours um i want to say we're 25 percent sometimes you know i think there's one particular one i think we were 25 percent difference on that and you know and then there is also the process too if the assessor and the property owner does not come to an agreement they can take it to the board of equalization and then the board will hear that
Speaker 18
8:18
argument as well and how often does that go in
Chair
Unverified
8:22
favor of the property owner again it would vary from county to county we're pretty active with our board we seem to have a very sophisticated property owner group in northwest arkansas so we're pretty active with ours this year i think we had one okay thank you very much representative rye you're recognized yes sir yes sir
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
8:44
thank you thank you mr chairman you turned yourself off hit the button again
russell question for you you got three approaches you got the cost you
got the income and sales approach to get the cost approach you use the most recent manual commercial manual isn't that Right. Yes, sir. Okay. And then once you get four or five sales within an area, isn't that right, then you hit the center and then you equalize. Isn't that right? Yeah, we're looking for the median. Okay. Well, let me ask you this. Is that not what we're doing here?
Is that the way that
Speaker 19
9:25
you guys are operating? Yes, sir. Yeah. I think probably in my experience when we have
Chair
Unverified
9:32
a conflict, sometimes it has to do with the capitalization rate. Typically, with low-income properties, you're going to have a lower vacancy. There's typically a waiting list, and so there's really no vacancy. But we will also, with those properties, you tend to have a higher repair and investment process with those lower-income properties.
So the capitalization rate, and we're talking usually a few points difference, which could have a percentage of value difference on there. And again, they get to bring it, they can bring their information to the board, and then we get to examine it, and we're looking at them pleading their case. And then usually we come to a compromise. Every now and then it may go to a county judge appeal or a circuit court appeal. And to your point.
Lindsay Bailey
Unverified
10:24
Oh, go ahead. Sorry. To your point, Representative, there could be a circumstance that's not outlandish where the income approach is not the lowest.
and this would be hamstringing the property owner from asking or asking to use a sale asking to use cost because you would be hamstrung with that income approach even if it were the highest you could have a
Chair
Unverified
10:46
situation with the cost approach where you have a really for some reason have a really low land value or the facilities itself are in really need of disrepair and would be create a lot of cost to improve and recover uh therefore that's that's
why you need to look at all three approaches to get an accurate view it could actually hurt in their favor at the end of the
Speaker 23
11:10
day the assessor wants market value follow-up please okay let me ask
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
11:19
you this though russell once even though this is going on you know let's say you got an apartment that's our housing that's put out there and it's 10 years old it's been treated rough instead of a year for a year or whatever it may be you may be looking at 80 percent remaining life
or isn't that right sir yes yes
Speaker 19
11:41
yeah yeah we would look at the the the re yeah the reo could be very have a huge
Chair
Unverified
11:46
impact on that property and um it would be it would could even do an injustice to the property owner if we just
Speaker 16
11:51
looked at the income approach thank you all right seeing no further
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
11:57
questions from committee thank you for your testimony
Speaker 2
11:59
we have no one else signed up speak for or against this bill represent batty would you like to close your
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
12:06
bill yes mr chairman i'd like to close just kind of a reason to understand the provision and and kind of discuss
some of the considerations that were were raised uh let's let's start that all real properties valued at fair market value for ad valorem purposes. Fair market value, as most of us know in the room, is what a willing buyer or willing seller would agree to exchange the property for in an arm's length sale. Affordable housing, though, is subject to restrictions from state and federal agencies as to its use, including who can live in the property, how much can be charged for rent, and others. These restrictions often impact what a willing buyer or a willing
seller would agree to in exchange for the property, i.e. the fair market value. Fair market value of affordable housing is highly impacted by the lower income the property can generate under those restrictions that are placed on the property. Right now there is no guidance in statute or regulation as to how an assessor can take the affordable housing character of the property into account when they're arriving at market value. And that's what this provision is asking for it's asking uh to consider those uh those issues when valuing the property
and with that i would appreciate a motion do pass and i also like an opportunity to see if um we get 75 of our members and or get the three quarters that we need in both chambers to pass the bill um so i'd ask you to to give me a good motion and and let's move this forward to the body all right represented Betty's closed
Speaker 2
13:42
for the bill what's will the committee have a motion do pass any discussion on the
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
13:48
motion seeing none all in favor say aye all opposed no certain nose have it I'm sorry bill has failed thank you mr.
Unknown speaker
13:56
chairman thank you committee with no further business for us we are adjourned
Agenda
REGULAR AGENDA
Number Sponsor Subtitle
HB1894 Beaty Jr. TO ESTABLISH A METHOD OF VALUATION FOR REAL PROPERTY USED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING; AND TO ESTABLISH A METHOD OF VALUATION FOR CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY UNDER ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 16, § 5.
HB1936 R. Burkes AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ELECTION TO CERTAIN MUNICIPAL OFFICES. PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATIONS.
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — CITY, COUNTY & LOCAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE- HOUSE, Apr 2, 2025 | Agenda | 2 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Representative R. Scott Richardson
Unverified
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
Speaker 2
Chair
Unverified
Lindsay Bailey
Unverified
Speaker 18
Speaker 21
Speaker 16
Speaker 24
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
Speaker 19
Speaker 23