PVA misses mark

Now that the Herald-Leader articles on fair property taxation have sent property valuation administrator David O’Neill backpedaling and apologizing for not doing his job, it seems like he has come up with a way to do only a portion of what is right.

His stipulation that a property owner will continue to get the tax break if the parcel is still 10 acres after excluding land for the house, gardens, pools, etc. is absolutely stupid. The parcel still isn’t being used for agriculture. This again seems like a way around doing the right thing.

In addition, he also stipulates that an owner of one of the 10-plus acre parcels will continue to receive the break if he has owned the parcel for five years. What is that all about? Why should that have a bearing on the situation?

These stipulations seem like things that O’Neill has arbitrarily come up with on his own to preserve the breaks.

Let’s hope the mayor, the Urban County Council and the school board don’t fall for this faulty plan to fix the problem.

This story was originally published March 13, 2016 at 3:22 PM with the headline "PVA misses mark."