Could a Connecticut town vote to delay property revaluation before doing the appraisal work?

Plain-English summary

In November 1995, Connecticut’s AG addressed a temporary law allowing towns to stay implementation of property tax revaluations while the legislature considered tax reform. The Office of Policy and Management asked whether a town first had to finish its revaluation before voting to stay implementation, and whether it could put off starting the work until the stay ended. The AG said neither extreme matched the statute: a town did not need to complete the work before voting, but it could not wait until the end of the stay to begin the entire process.

The statute allowed a stay of implementation for up to two years in aggregate. The AG distinguished conducting a revaluation from implementing one: the appraisal work had to exist before the new values could be put into effect. Thus a town had to complete the revaluation before the stay expired and implement it then. The answer mattered to OPM because municipalities had notification duties tied to implementation and possible grant penalties for failing to notify.

Town officials and assessors at the time

The opinion permitted a stay vote before the revaluation was complete, while requiring enough work during the stay for implementation at its end.

OPM and taxpayers at the time

The AG linked the interpretation to OPM’s implementation-notice role. He did not decide any particular town’s appraisal quality or tax assessment.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Did a town need a completed revaluation before voting for a stay?
A: No. The AG found no such prerequisite in the stay statute.

Q: Could it postpone all revaluation work until the stay expired?
A: No. The work had to be complete in time to implement revaluation at the end of the stay.

Q: How long could the statutory stay last?
A: Under the law the AG analyzed in 1995, the aggregate limit was two years.

Background and statutory framework

The AG read the implementation stay in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62h alongside municipal notice duties in § 12-62(e). He gave “implementation” its ordinary meaning of putting an already conducted revaluation into effect.

Citations and references

Statutes: Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62h; Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62(e).

Source

• Landing page: https://portal.ct.gov/AG/Opinions
• Opinion page: https://portal.ct.gov/ag/opinions/1995-formal-opinions/mr-reginald-jones-office-of-policy-and-management-1995034-formal-opinion-attorney-general-of-connect

Original opinion text

Mr. Reginald Jones, Office of Policy and Management, 1995-034 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

Attorney General's Opinion

Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal

November 22, 1995

Mr. Reginald Jones

Secretary

Office of Policy and Management

80 Washington Street

Hartford, CT 06106

Dear Mr. Jones:

Your office presented us with the following two questions relating to Section 51 of 1994 Conn. Pub. Act No. 94-4 of the May Special Session now codified as Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62h:

1) Is a municipality required to revalue all real property for property tax purposes by taking all the normal and necessary actions involved in the revaluation of real property, before its legislative body may vote to stay the implementation of said revaluation?

2) Does this legislation allow a municipality to defer beginning the process of revaluation until after the conclusion of the 1995 session of the General Assembly?1

These questions clearly appear to deal with an issue of local governmental concern, an area which we traditionally have referred to local counsel. See Conn. Op. Atty. Gen. April 4, 1995. However, because you are vested with the authority to impose penalties on those municipalities which fail to notify you that they have implemented a revaluation, the provisions of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62h are relevant to the conduct of your statutory duties.

Under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62(e), as amended by 1993 Conn. Pub. Acts No. 93-373, the chief executive officer of each municipality must file a written notice of the implementation of a revaluation with the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management not later than five business days following the date on which final action with respect to the establishment of a mill rate for the revalued grand list is taken. The Secretary may impose a penalty on those municipalities which fail to timely file such notice. The penalty is in the form of a reduction in the total amount of state grants-in-aid made to such municipality. According to the information you have supplied us, certain towns have notified you that they have stayed implementation of a revaluation pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62h. Additionally, it is your understanding that certain towns who have stayed implementation have not actually undertaken the process of revaluation. We note for background purposes, that each municipality in this state is mandated to revalue all of the real estate in its respective confines every ten years. See Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62(a); State ex rel. Eastern Color Printing Co. v. Jenks, 150 Conn. 444, 450-51, 190 A.2d 591 (1963).

Our analysis begins with the statutory provision which gives rise to your questions. Section 12-62h provides in pertinent part:

Notwithstanding any provision of title 12 of the general statutes, the local legislative body of a municipality may, at its option, stay the implementation of such municipality's revaluation in order to implement the recommendations of the Property Tax Reform Commission enacted during the 1995 session of the general assembly. The local legislative body of a municipality may stay such implementation for a period or periods not to exceed in the aggregate two years. Any distressed municipality shall by majority vote of its legislative body approve such stay and any municipality, other than a distressed municipality shall by two-thirds vote of its legislative body approve such stay. ... If during the 1995 session of the general assembly no legislation is enacted concerning property tax reform[,] each municipality which has stayed the implementation of revaluation or phase-in of revaluation shall recommence the implementation of such revaluation or phase-in upon the expiration of any stay implemented according to the provisions of this section.

(Emphasis added.)

The foregoing provision took effect from its passage, June 9, 1994, 1994 Conn. Pub. Act No. 94-4, § 85.

Section 12-62h permits municipalities the option of staying "the implementation of such municipality's revaluation" for a period or periods not to exceed two years in the aggregate. We have reviewed the legislative history of 1994 Conn. Pub. Act No. 94-4 (May Special Session) but there is an absence of any discussion with regard to the mechanics involved in staying the implementation of a town's revaluation.

In regard to your agency's statutory responsibilities, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62h will affect the town notification required at the termination of the statutorily provided stay. Section 12-62h permits a stay of the implementation of a revaluation "for a period or periods not to exceed in the aggregate two years." The stay's purpose is to allow municipalities the opportunity to implement any property tax reforms measures which are enacted during the 1995 session. The 1995 regular session ended on June 7, 1995. Because it was conceivable that the 1995 Legislature could have enacted such legislation on the last day of the session,2 a municipality whose revaluation would normally be implemented for tax payments due in July, 1995, could have implemented a stay as late as June 7, 1995, the last day of the session. Thus, if such a stay were for the maximum permitted two years, it would extend implementation of the revaluation until June, 1997.

The stay of the implementation does not, however, stay the town's requirement to conduct the revaluation prior to the conclusion of the stay. In the construction of the general statutes, words shall be construed according to the commonly approved usage of the language. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-1. "Implement" means "to put into practical effect; carry out." The American Heritage Dictionary, (2d College Ed., 1985), p. 646. In order to implement a revaluation it must have already been conducted. "Conduct," on the other hand, means "to direct the course of." Id. at 306. Therefore, in order to implement, or carry out, a revaluation, the revaluation must be in existence, i.e., it must have been conducted.

In answer to your precise questions, there is no statutory requirement that the revaluation be conducted prior to the two-year stay authorized by Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62h. However, although a municipality may have issued a stay under section 12-62h to commence on June 7, 1995, the end of the 1995 session, it may not defer beginning the process of revaluation until June 7, 1997. Instead, such revaluation must be completed prior to the end of the two year stay and implemented at that time.

We trust this answers your questions.

Very truly yours,

Richard Blumenthal

Attorney General

1 This question was presented to us in a supplemental memorandum from Peter N. Dibble, Undersecretary, Intergovernmental Policy Division, Office of Policy and Management, wherein Mr. Dibble substituted this question for an earlier one. 2 Section 12-62h specifically provides for the recommencement of the implementation of a revaluation upon the expiration of any stay issued under the authority of said section if the Legislature fails to enact property tax reform legislation.