Homeowner disputes finished-basement adjustments in Union County revaluation

Homeowner Brian Hickey appealed the 2025 assessment of his Brookmeade subdivision home, arguing that the county’s schedule of values undercounts the market effect of a finished versus unfinished basement and that the county’s comparable sales selection overstated his assessed value.

Hickey presented a detailed adjusted-sales calculation that included three sales he said better matched his home; he argued the county relied on two sales with finished basements and applied a $15-per-square-foot adjustment to finished-basement area that he called too low compared with market expectations. Hickey told the board he obtained contractor quotes to finish his basement in excess of $100,000 and said finished living area should be reflected at higher per-square-foot values in market comparisons.

County appraisal staff explained the assessor’s office uses a schedule of values to adjust comparables and that their market analysis separated basement homes from non-basement homes because the market treats them differently; staff said the county’s adjusted analysis supported the current value and that running alternate comp sets produced valuations close to the county’s number.

Board decision: After discussion, the board voted to retain the county’s valuation for Hickey’s property; staff reiterated that schedule-of-values adjustments govern consistent treatment and that sales evidence used matched grade, neighborhood and condition.

Why it matters: Taxpayers commonly dispute the assessor’s schedule-based adjustments for interior features such as finished basements. This hearing showed how the county uses a standardized schedule to maintain equity across many homes and how taxpayers can present alternate adjusted-sales analyses.