Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Appraisal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident tells Tift County commissioners GMS appraisals exceed sales and violate DOR rules
Summary
At a Tift County Board of Commissioners meeting a resident urged a review of county appraisal work, saying dozens of values exceed sales prices and citing Department of Revenue guidance; county staff said appeals remain open and GMAS will review submitted concerns.
A resident raised detailed concerns about property appraisals and the county’s contractor during public comment at a Tift County Board of Commissioners meeting, saying automated appraisal settings produced hundreds of values above recent sales and that the Department of Revenue’s rules limit processing values above a sale price.
The resident, who did not give a full name for the record, said the county’s appraisal vendor (referred to in the comment as “GMS” or “GMAS”) produced about 436 “errant values” that “violate state law,” and cited a Department of Revenue Local Government Services Division rule referenced in the record as “5 60 11 10.02 n.” The resident also said their analysis showed “a whopping 59.08%” in excess valuation in follow-up reviews and that one neighbor’s post-sale renovation and rental were handled differently.
The complaint included a request that the county consider a referendum asking state or outside review of work performed by the vendor. The resident also said they had met with county tax office personnel and vendor representatives and supplied evidence during an earlier meeting.
A county official responding at the meeting said the appeals process is still active and that GMAS agreed to review the submitted materials; staff said they expected a response shortly after the first of next month. The official noted that the Board of Assessors operates independently under Georgia law and that taxpayers still have administrative appeal options, including the board of equalization and superior court.
Another resident, Hayward Fowler of 1018 Park Avenue, asked whether the appraisal process was finished; the county official replied it was ongoing and that not all required 30-day notices had been mailed yet. The resident who spoke urged commissioners “to consider passing a referendum requesting the government to review the work performed by GMAS and Tift County,” but did not present a formal petition or motion for immediate action by the board.
No formal motion or vote on vendor review or referendum occurred during the meeting. County staff said they would continue to track appeals and follow up with GMAS on the materials presented.
