Lincoln County Board of Equalization upholds most assessments, lowers several after appeals

LINCOLN COUNTY, S.D. — The Lincoln County Board of Equalization met Tuesday and resolved a full docket of property appeals, largely sustaining assessor valuations but approving several reductions and stipulations after testimony from property owners and staff.

The board opened with roll call and moved through a series of single-parcel appeals, public testimony and staff reports from Carla Gossen, Lincoln County director of equalization, and deputy assessor Ethan Pyske. Most contested items involved single‑family homes whose 2025 assessments were challenged by owners or their representatives; several appeals raised flood or drainage problems and one owner asked the board to reclassify multiple small parcels as agricultural.

Why it matters: property assessments determine taxpayers’ bills and appeal outcomes often turn on comparables, documented improvements and whether a parcel can claim agricultural classification. Several appellants pressed for reductions that they said reflected physical damage, deferred maintenance or flood branding that affects marketability.

Key outcomes and reasoning

- Appeals that followed assessor recommendations: In multiple cases the board voted to leave the assessor’s 2025 valuations in place after staff testimony showing comparable sales and the county’s mass‑appraisal approach. Staff repeatedly explained the county’s level of assessment methodology (the South Dakota Department of Revenue reports countywide ratios around 89–90 percent) and that taxable value differs from full market value.

- 104 Rommel Ave., Lenox (BS Squared LLC): Staff inspected an older two‑story and found deferred maintenance; staff lowered the structure value and recommended a reduced total. The board adopted a motion valuing the land at $44,625 and structures at $196,000 for a total assessed value of $240,625, a figure lower than the appellant’s request but below the original 2025 assessment.

- 4071/08270 Sixth St. (Thomas and Stacy Stengrim): The owners described repeated ponding and past flood damage. After back-and-forth about whether structure values had been affected, the board declined a larger reduction to structure values but voted to lower the land value to $150,000 while leaving structures at the assessor’s recommended levels. The board record notes the owner’s testimony about a $75,000 payout in 2014 and ongoing ponding during smaller rain events.

- Parcel lot reclassifications and agricultural classification discussion: Owner William Thorson presented three adjoining parcels that had been split from a larger farmstead. Staff reviewed South Dakota statutory requirements and Lincoln County practice for agricultural classification (income thresholds and minimum‑acre rules). The board agreed to reclassify one of the parcels to agricultural for the 2025 assessment year and adopted an agricultural land valuation for that tract (approximately $3,520.57 per acre translated to a land assessment in the range noted on the record). For the remaining small parcels the board accepted reduced non‑ag valuations for 2025 but directed staff and the owner to pursue a consolidated agricultural application for the 2026 assessment year (taxes payable 2027) now that a new plat has been filed.

- Multiunit/multi‑building appeals: For several larger multiunit or commercial properties in Sioux Falls and Harrisburg the board accepted the assessor’s recommended valuations after staff presented limited local sales and cost‑approach data; those items remain subject to further review in court or via stipulation in some instances.

Votes at a glance (selected parcels)

- Parcel 100.49.66.H052 (27121 Mockingbird Trail, owner Wayne Edmondson): Board accepted assessor recommendation; motion passed and was recorded as carried.

- Parcel 270.18.03.006 (104 Rommel Ave., Lenox — BS Squared LLC): Assessor and staff inspection recommended lowering the structure value. Board approved a total assessed value of $240,625 (land $44,625; structure $196,000).

- Parcel 099.50.17.B200 (Thomas & Stacy Stengrim, 407108270 Sixth Street): After testimony about recurrent ponding and a prior $75,000 loss, board reduced the land value to $150,000 and left structure and accessory values per assessor recommendation; motion carried.

- Parcel 099.50.05.1021 (Hunter Stenger Trust, 4717/5270 Third Street): The appeal raised repeated flooding and collapsing drainage pipes in the neighborhood. The board paused this appeal for further consideration to allow a commissioner who was temporarily unavailable to participate; the matter was held for follow up.

- Parcels owned by William Thorson (three adjoining tracts arising from earlier splits): Board determined one tract qualified for agricultural classification for 2025 and applied an agricultural valuation; the other two tracts were adjusted downward as non‑ag parcels for 2025 with direction to reapply under the replat for 2026 assessments (taxes payable 2027).

- Multiunit and commercial valuations (examples): The board accepted assessor recommendations for several recently built multifamily developments and commercial parcels where staff had used a mix of local sales, regional comparables and cost approaches; several of those properties previously appealed to the Office of Hearing Examiners or are pending litigation, and the board’s actions reflect the county appraisal record.

What staff told the board: - County appraisers emphasized their use of both cost and market approaches, local comparable sales and an 89–90 percent countywide assessment ratio per state reporting. Interior inspections requested by staff were sometimes declined by owners; staff said interior inspections are routinely requested to verify finished area and quality adjustments. Where staff performed interior or exterior inspections, they reported condition issues that supported modest downward adjustments.

Notable testimony and concerns: - Flooding/drainage: Multiple appellants described historic and recurring ponding, with some saying smaller rain events now create the flooding problems that formerly required much larger storms. Appellants said the branding effect — that realtors and buyers know the parcel floods — has made properties harder to sell and depresses market value.

- Comparables and adjustments: Appellants frequently presented broker price opinions, Zillow estimates and sales comparables; staff explained that the county’s appraisal system uses above‑grade living area and a priced lower‑level finish rather than simply dividing sale price by total finished area, and that certain improvements (attached garages, pools) are handled as separate value components.

Next steps / follow up

Several appeals concluded with motions that instructed staff and appellants to file or resubmit documentation for the 2026 assessment year (taxes payable 2027), including agricultural classification paperwork and interior inspections. A few cases remain in litigation or awaiting a judge’s ruling; the board noted those matters are outside its immediate jurisdiction while appeals proceed through the courts.

The board will post certified decisions and updated assessment records to the county website; property owners are reminded that reclassification applications have statutory deadlines and that qualifying evidence (income statements, management unit documentation) is required to support agricultural classification.

Ending note: The board’s session combined routine procedural work and detailed factual disputes over condition, flood risk and the proper use of comparables; the meeting record shows staff and appellants offered documentation and the board applied the county’s valuation rules case by case.

Speakers quoted or cited in this article are identified in the meeting record.