Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.

Page 4 · column 5 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved

The clipping this text was read from
The clipping this text was read from

lauu use ii iiiing iees are ioo high.

"I can see it if the parcels are contiguous but if you have 100 acres in Hawthorne District and 100 acres in Piedmont, is that going to make a difference?” asked Estes.

Under the county's old system of recording land ownership by districts, processing land use applications for property in different districts under the same ownership would require extra work by the Commissioner of Revenue, Miller agreed.

With the county’s new computer system,, however, all the parcels owned by a single person are listed on the same page in the land book and so processing several applications will take no extra work, according to Miller.

He noted, however, that if a single $10 application fee is charged for several parcels under the same ownership and one parcel is later withdrawn from the land use program, then the individual will have to reapply for land use for the balance of the property.

Miller also opposed requiring annual revaluation for properties receiving special land use assessment. “We don’t want to get too darn bureaucratic...If it’s in land use, let it stay in until the use changes or the governing body changes the ordinance,” he said, noting that law requires property owners receiving the special assessment to report any changes in the use of their land. In addition, he voiced opposition to adding extra penalties on failure to report use changes, an option the county has in drafting its ordinance.

Another choice the county can make is whether to permit late filing of land use applications. Miller proposed that this option be pointed out to the supervisors with the notation that the planning commissioners are neither for nor against. The vote to recommend adoption of a use value taxation ordinance incorporating all of Miller’s suggestions was unanimous. The planners proposed that use value, if approved by the supervisors, lake effect simultaneous with the

78.7%