Utah County Board of Equalization approves routine items, accepts one late valuation appeal and denies another

The Utah County Commission’s Board of Equalization met March 5, 2025, and approved a series of routine procedural items, accepted one late-filed property valuation appeal after an assessor-identified factual error, and denied a second late appeal for lack of county error.

The board, meeting as the Board of Equalization at 2:01 p.m., approved the minutes and an assessor process report without discussion, then voted to approve a property class change from secondary residential to primary residential. The board also considered two petitions to hear appeals of property valuations filed after the deadline: it accepted the petition for Josh Steele after the assessor’s office flagged a factual error and denied the petition for Mark Strickland after finding no county mailing error.

The matters before the board were largely procedural and resolved by motion and voice vote. A county staff member summarized the Strickland petition, saying that in reviewing the mailing of the notice “we're not seeing a basis to recommend approval here,” and that the address on file had been unchanged for several years. At the hearing on the Steele petition, Mark Carter of the Assessor’s Office told the board, “The percent complete wasn't a concern, but there was another item that we did see in note that we do feel would be actioned to approve.” When the presiding board member asked whether the assessor concurred that a factual error existed, Carter replied, “Yes, there is indeed 1.”

Votes at a glance

- Approve minutes (motion to approve minutes): motion seconded; outcome: approved by voice vote. (Transcript evidence: board member motion and voice votes.)

- Approve assessor process report (motion to approve assessor approved process report): motion seconded; outcome: approved by voice vote. (Transcript evidence: assessor report presented and approved by the board.)

- Approve class change — secondary residential to primary residential (motion to approve class change): motion seconded; outcome: approved by voice vote. (Transcript evidence: motion and aye votes recorded.)

- Accept petition to hear late appeal — Josh Steele (petition to BOE to hear appeal of property valuation after filing deadline): motion to approve to hear the late appeal; outcome: approved. Note: Assessor’s Office identified a factual error that could justify accepting the late filing. (Transcript evidence: Mark Carter, Assessor’s Office, description of findings and Carter’s confirmation that “there is indeed 1” factual error.)

- Deny petition to hear late appeal — Mark Strickland (petition to BOE to hear appeal of property valuation after filing deadline): motion to deny; outcome: denied. Reason given: assessor review found no county error in mailing of notice and no basis to recommend approval; owner’s claim of an incorrect address did not show a change in the county records. (Transcript evidence: assessor staff explanation that the address had been unchanged for several years and recommendation to deny.)

The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn that passed by voice vote. No formal roll-call tallies were recorded in the transcript excerpt; all recorded outcomes were by voice vote with “aye” responses noted on the record.

Background and context

The Board of Equalization handles appeals of property valuations and classification for county property tax purposes. Under the board’s procedures, some appeals filed after statutory or administrative deadlines may be heard if the board determines there was a county error (for example, a factual error in valuation or a failure in the county’s notice process). At this meeting the assessor’s office recommended accepting the Steele appeal because of a factual error it identified; the Strickland appeal was denied after the assessor said the county’s mailing and address records showed no error.

What was not specified on the record

- Exact vote counts and the names of members who moved or seconded each motion were not provided in the transcript excerpt; outcomes are recorded as voice votes with “aye” recorded. - Specific details of the factual error identified in the Steele appeal were not provided on the record beyond the assessor’s statement that one existed. - Any follow-up actions, such as scheduling a full hearing on the accepted Steele appeal or timelines for further review, were not specified in the excerpt.

The Board of Equalization adjourned after the actions listed above.