Banner County Board of Equalization hears tax protests, accepts assessor recommendations and a number of reductions

Banner County Board of Equalization members met in the courthouse courtroom on Tuesday, July 8, and heard tax protests for multiple rural parcels, then took votes on each protest after the assessor presented recommendations.

The board set a five-minute public presentation limit for each protest and a one-minute warning from the clerk. Protesters presented evidence for individual parcels, the assessor — identified in the hearing as Casey — gave recommendations, and the board voted on each protest at the end of the hearing.

The process and timing were emphasized early: the board chair explained that each property owner would have five minutes to present, a clerk would give a one-minute warning, the assessor would then give recommendations, and the board would decide parcel-by-parcel when all presentations were finished.

Votes at a glance

- Protest 2, Thomas and Carol Ackerman (parcel 40002357): Board accepted the protesters’ requested reduction; new combined value adopted 136,071 (motion passed). - Protest 1, Beverly Edens (parcel 40014747): Board left the assessor’s valuation in place at $235,038 (assessor recommendation affirmed; motion passed). - Protest 3, Rodney and Kathleen Van Pelt (parcel 40011240): Board accepted the assessor’s adjusted building valuation; new total adopted $110,009.63 (motion passed). - Protest 4, Julie Rogers (parcel 40023608): Board accepted the assessor’s updated valuation reflecting corrected building year; assessor recommendation adopted (motion passed). - Protest 5, Cross Family LLC (parcel 40001435): Board accepted assessor recommendation (no change from the assessor’s current sheet; motion passed). - Protest 6, Cross Family LLC (parcel 40001423): Board accepted assessor recommendation (motion passed). - Protest 7, Cross Family LLC (parcel 40001539): Board accepted assessor recommendation (no change; motion passed). - Protest 8, Lane and Robin Darnell (parcel 40000664): Board voted to adopt the assessor’s revised classifications and values for buildings and improvements while leaving land values unchanged (motion passed). - Protest 10, Darnell Ranch Inc (parcel 040004627): Board accepted assessor recommendation of no change (motion passed). - Protest 11 (parcel 040005097): Board accepted the values discussed in the hearing (assessor recommendation adopted; motion passed). - Protest 12 (parcel 40005425): Board accepted the assessor’s recommendation where land remained and building values were set as discussed in the packet (motion passed). - Protest 13 (parcel 40005437): Board accepted assessor recommendation of no change (motion passed). - Protest 14 (parcel 40001830): Board accepted assessor’s adjustments separating certain feedlot structures and adjusted building totals as recommended; land value unchanged (motion passed). - Protest 15 (parcel 40001822): Board accepted assessor recommendation of no change (motion passed). - Protest 16 (parcel 40001709): Board accepted assessor recommendation of no change (motion passed). - Protest 17 (parcel 40001911): Board accepted the assessor’s updated building values (assessor recommendation adopted; motion passed). - Protest 19 (parcel 40024547): Board accepted assessor recommendation of no change (motion passed).

Why it matters

The hearing resolved owner protests about how agricultural and rural properties in Banner County are valued for 2025, including disputes about classification (for example, mobile vs. modular housing), the treatment of outbuildings and feedlot infrastructure, and the use of soil-code–based acreage values for CRP (Conservation Reserve Program) and grassland parcels. Those determinations affect tax bills and, in some cases, owners’ plans for land use or participation in federal programs.

Details and board comments

Owners described physical conditions they said reduce value — deteriorated foundations, crumbling outbuildings, and portable buildings that owners said should not be valued the same as permanent structures. At least one speaker, Paul Eanes, representing elderly landowners, described his parcel as enrolled in CRP with no improvements and urged consideration of limited income and lack of services. Several agricultural owners and representatives, including Lane Darnell and Lisa Brenner, repeatedly pressed for countywide equalization of depreciation and for consistent treatment of feedlots and farm-site values.

Assessor’s role and recommendations

Casey, the Banner County assessor, repeated the standard sequence at each protest: the owner presents evidence, then Casey presents the assessor’s recommendation. At one moment Casey summarized a recommendation with, “My recommendation is no change,” and in other cases recommended adjustments after field review and documentation (for example, reclassifying a building type to reflect a mobile or transient structure rather than a modular home).

Board procedure and next steps

The board used roll-call votes to adopt the assessor’s recommendations or the protesters’ requested values in individual motions. Several protest packets and comparative spreadsheets were discussed at length; board members and staff noted challenges navigating multi-page packets and asked for clearer tabbing and organization for future hearings.

Ending

The board recessed briefly at 10:45 a.m. and resumed to complete the remaining protests. Owners and representatives were told the assessor would be in touch about final outcomes and any follow-up paperwork. No new appeals or court actions were announced during the meeting.