Vermont Transco, LLC v. Town of Vernon

Vermont Transco LLC v. Town of Vernon, 197 Vt. 585 (Vt. 2014) · Supreme Court of Vermont · August 8, 2014 · No. 2013-243

Summary

The Vermont Supreme Court reviewed a property-tax appeal involving the valuation of Vermont Transco’s electrical substations, transmission lines, fiber-optic line, land, and utility easements in the Town of Vernon. The Court held that the state appraiser needed to make more detailed findings regarding the useful lifespan of the equipment used to calculate depreciation and that utility easements could not be included in the taxable valuation. The Court otherwise upheld the rejection of first-year depreciation and declined to reach an unpreserved claim that the Iowa Curve depreciation method was required.

Holdings

  1. The court did not reach the merits of the claim that the Iowa Curve method was legally required because Vermont Transco failed to preserve that argument before the state appraiser.
  2. A state appraiser must make sufficiently detailed findings concerning the lifespan of property used to calculate depreciation so that the reviewing court can determine whether the findings are supported by the record. The state appraiser's conclusory acceptance of the Town's 65-year useful-life estimate was insufficient.
  3. The state appraiser did not abuse its discretion by declining to allow a full year of depreciation for equipment acquired during 2010 and valued as new at the end of that year.
  4. Utility easements are not subject to Vermont municipal property taxation and their appraised value may not be included in the grand list valuation absent a statute specifically providing otherwise.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the state appraiser was required as a matter of law to use the Iowa Curve depreciation method based on prior Vermont decisions.
  2. Whether the state appraiser made sufficiently detailed findings concerning the lifespans of the equipment used to calculate depreciation.
  3. Whether the state appraiser abused its discretion by declining to allow first-year depreciation for equipment acquired during 2010.
  4. Whether the value of utility easements could be included in the municipal property-tax valuation.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (22)

  • Vermont Electric Power Co. v. Town of Vernon, 174 Vt. 471, 807 A.2d 430 (2002)(applied and distinguished)
  • Vermont Electric Power Co. v. Town of Cavendish, 158 Vt. 369, 611 A.2d 389 (1992)(discussed)
  • City of Barre v. Town of Orange, 152 Vt. 442, 444, 566 A.2d 951, 952 (1989)(followed)
  • Vanderminden v. Town of Wells, 2013 VT 49, ¶¶ 8-9, 194 Vt. 96, 75 A.3d 598(followed)
  • Adams v. Town of West Haven, 147 Vt. 618, 620 n.*, 523 A.2d 1244, 1245 n.* (1987)(followed)
  • Barnett v. Town of Wolcott, 2009 VT 32, ¶ 5, 185 Vt. 627, 970 A.2d 1281 (mem.)(followed)
  • State v. Ben-Mont Corp., 163 Vt. 53, 61, 652 A.2d 1004, 1009 (1994)(followed)
  • In re Green Mountain Power Corp., 2012 VT 89, ¶ 73 n.7, 192 Vt. 429, 60 A.3d 654(followed)
  • Kachadorian v. Town of Woodstock, 144 Vt. 348, 351, 477 A.2d 965, 967 (1984)(followed)
  • New England Power Co. v. Town of Barnet, 134 Vt. 498, 505-06, 367 A.2d 1363, 1368 (1976)(distinguished)

Showing top 10 of 22.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…