Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Appeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Marshall County appeal board delays decision after homeowner cites dust, odors and heavy trucks from nearby chicken operation
Summary
A Plymouth homeowner appealed his 2025 assessment, saying a new commercial chicken facility 240 feet from his house has reduced his property's value by creating persistent dust, airborne poultry dander and heavy commercial traffic. The board gave him until Oct. 30 to submit a market analysis and other evidence.
PHIL ELLINGER, a member of the Marshall County Property Tax Appeal Board, presided over an administrative hearing on Sept. 17, 2025, where Plymouth resident Wade Salier appealed his 2025 property assessment for 5378 Sage Road, saying a newly built chicken production facility directly behind his house has harmed his property and health.
Salier, who identified himself as the petitioner, told the board the nearest center line of the access road to his living room window is about 60 feet and the front of the chicken building is approximately 240 feet from his back door. "Every time you take a breath of air at my house, you're breathing in that chicken ****," Salier said during his testimony, describing what he repeatedly called “dander” and dust that he said visibly floats over his yard.
The board asked clarifying questions about sales evidence and valuation. Peter Paul, a representative of the county assessor's office, described the office's role in estimating market value and the presumption that assessments represent market value in use. Paul said county staff had visited the property and noted typical valuation approaches but acknowledged the board's task is to determine whether the evidence shows a reduced market value due to the nearby operation.
Salier described additional concerns: semi trailers and commercial feed and egg trucks using Sage Road, damage to the roadway and a progressive accumulation of waste and dust inside the building that he said will worsen over time. He showed photographs and video excerpts to the board illustrating airborne particles and said the building is roughly 520 feet long. He also said he plans to contact environmental authorities (referred to in testimony as "iDEN") if testing shows contamination above regulatory thresholds.
Board member Angie Snyder and Ellinger repeatedly asked whether Salier had sought a realtor market analysis or an appraisal and whether the assessor's office had re-inspected the parcel since the facility became operational. Salier said he had spoken informally to a realtor but had not yet obtained a formal market analysis or appraisal; the assessor's representative said staff had visited the site but had not returned in the last year to re-inspect the property since the facility went into use.
Rather than issue a final determination at the hearing, Ellinger offered Salier time to obtain a market analysis and any environmental findings he wished to submit. "We will give you until October 30 to submit any additional information to the assessor's office for us to review before we make the decision," Ellinger said. The board placed Salier on the roster for an October 30 hearing slot and said it would review any documents submitted to the assessor's office before making a final determination.
The board distinguished the evidentiary question it must decide — whether the assessed value should be reduced based on market evidence — from the regulatory or public-health complaints Salier raised. The board invited Salier to provide a market analysis and any environmental documentation; it did not make a formal finding at the Sept. 17 session.
The board closed the hearing after Salier confirmed he had no further testimony. The appeal remains open for the board to review materials submitted to the assessor's office before the Oct. 30 hearing.
