GAGE COUNTY, Neb. — Property owners pressed the Gage County Board of Equalization on July 21 after a countywide revaluation raised many land and home-site values, and the board approved its no-change list of protested parcels by a 5-0 vote.
At the meeting, homeowners and acreage owners said sudden increases — including a $10,000 rise on the “first acre” home-site valuation and larger uplifts tied to recent sales — are driving higher assessments across the county and are difficult for residents to understand. Several speakers asked for clearer documentation of how condition and quality ratings and computed values are assigned.
The revaluation was described by assessor’s office staff and a contracted appraiser as an effort to equalize values across the county after a new data system and recent sales showed disparities. The assessor’s office said it raised the per-parcel home-site value from $20,000 to $30,000 this year for everyone in the county; staff also pointed to high recent sale prices for acreages and a new valuation system (MIPS) that imports physical data and applies standardized depreciation. "The acre that the house actually sits on was valued at $20,000. They've increased that to $30,000 this year," said Patty, an assessor's office staff member, explaining the countywide change to home-site valuation.
Why it matters: property valuations determine tax shares among county taxing entities; owners said the changes can raise taxes even if the county attempts to limit levy increases. Taxpayers asked about options to review and appeal values, and staff and the board described internal equalization steps and external appeals to the state-level protest process (referred to in the hearing as “TURK”).
Most urgent details and board action
- The board moved to approve the no-change determinations for property valuation protests numbered 1–30 on the July 21 list; Commissioner Dorn moved, Commissioner Haxby seconded, and the motion carried 5-0.
- Residents raised two recurring concerns: (1) the apparent size of land increases on individual parcels compared with recent farm-acre sale prices, and (2) how building condition and quality are classified and documented in the assessor’s files.
What participants said
- Steven D. Raleigh, a property owner protesting a 20,000 increase in assessed value on an acreage, cited nearby farmland sales in the $6,100–$7,100 per-acre range and said those market prices did not justify a $20,000 jump in his parcel’s assessed value. "We're jumping it by 20,000," Raleigh said of his assessment increase.
- Derek Crony protested the condition and quality rating applied to his dwelling and submitted a recent appraisal. Crony said the home “has a deck that has to be fully rebuilt. It's falling in. I have basement that is gonna have to be fully redone,” and asked that the assessor adopt condition and quality scores that match the appraisal. The assessor’s office staff said the county adjusted overall equalization and that some components (land versus dwelling) can explain discrepancies between an appraisal and the county’s assessed split.
- Jennifer Swanson, another property owner, asked the board to note that the change was a broad revaluation exercise rather than a one-off valuation. "This was more of a revaluation than just valuation and increase," she said, and presented comparable sales and percent-change calculations arguing her parcel’s increase was larger than local trends.
How county staff explained the changes
- Assessor-office staff and the county's contracted appraiser said the office used three-year (and in some acreage cases two-year) sale windows to set median level-of-value targets required by the state. They said the county needed to bring certain town and rural neighborhoods into the state-acceptable median range (about 92%–100% of market sales as explained at the hearing) and that a 10% uplift was applied to some Beatrice residential values to meet that standard.
- The county is implementing MIPS, a new data system that more explicitly records building features (siding, basement finish, plumbing fixtures, porches) and applies depreciation algorithms; officials said the system changed how outbuildings and finishes are priced compared with older flat-dollar entries. The assessor’s office indicated that listing or finishing a basement in the data can materially change computed values.
Appeals, transparency and process concerns
- Several residents said they had difficulty obtaining the full assessor-file documentation before filing protests. The assessor’s office told the audience files and record cards are public and that staff would provide records on request; staff also recommended state appeal to TURK if local review does not resolve a protest.
- The county discussed whether to assume a finished basement in cases where interior access is not granted; staff said historically the county inspected a portion of properties interiorly but that interior inspections have become less common, creating challenges for accuracy.
What the board decided and next steps
- The formal action recorded at the hearing: approval of the no-change determinations for items 1–30 on the July 21 property valuation protest list (motion by Commissioner Dorn; second by Commissioner Haxby; vote 5-0). Board members and staff said equalization work will continue, and residents were advised they may pursue a state-level appeal (TURK) if unsatisfied.
- Staff and the contracted appraiser encouraged owners to request file records and, when possible, to provide appraisals or allow interior inspections to support condition and quality claims.
Ending
Board members closed the session after the votes and noted the next protest hearing schedule; staff said they would continue countywide equalization work and offered to provide records to protesters who requested them at the meeting.