Committee hears overview of appraisal, mill levy and taxpayer appeals process

Bob, a presenter to the committee, gave a technical overview of how a mill levy is developed and described the taxpayer appeal timeline for property valuations. He told the committee that a mill levy has two components—the budget and the assessed value—and illustrated the calculation with an example: “If we have a $50,000,000 budget and we have a $400,000,000 assessed value … the calculation would be 1.25. And if we convert that into mils … we would get 125 mils.”

Bob summarized the informal appeal process and statutory deadlines. He said valuation notices are sent statutorily by March 1 and that “any taxpayer can appeal the… county appraisal to the county appraiser within 30 days after the date of the mailing and evaluation notice.” He also noted that taxpayers have multiple opportunities to challenge valuations during the year (informal meeting with the county appraiser in the spring, paying taxes under protest in December or in May when the second half is due, and then appeals to higher bodies such as the Board of Tax Appeals).

The committee pressed staff on limits to state intervention after a member cited a widely reported March 11, 2024, instance in which the Property Valuation Division (PVD) threatened stronger enforcement actions. Ted Smith, chief counsel with the Department of Revenue, told the committee that the department conducts ratio studies and communicates findings to county commissioners under statute and that “there are appeal rights in both those cases. If a county appraiser or its county commissioners disagree with what PVD's done, they can protest that, take it straight to the board of tax appeals, and the board of tax appeals will basically evaluate that and see if PVD was correct in its assessment.” Smith added the department typically augments local offices' resources rather than taking over operations.

Committee members asked whether counties are always informed of their appeal rights when the department raises compliance concerns. Smith said he would locate and share correspondence sent to the member’s county over recent years and described typical follow-up (letters to roughly 20–25 counties per year and offers to appear in person or virtually).

The presentation also touched on valuation methodology for special property types: commercial income properties can be assessed using an income approach if rent and other data are available, and agricultural land valuation relies on soils information provided by federal agencies and academic studies, not onsite soil testing by county appraisers. Bob emphasized that a property’s appraised valuation need not increase to be appealable.

The committee did not take formal action on the material and directed follow-up questions and document requests to staff.