Buncombe County board adopts streamlined bylaws, discusses hearing procedures and notice practices

The Buncombe County Board of Equalization and Review approved revised bylaws and discussed proposed hearing procedures and the county's increased mailing of notices of value.

Members voted unanimously to adopt the bylaws after discussion of procedural changes, including a new “good cause” provision that lists circumstances such as hurricanes, death of a taxpayer or serious family illness. County staff also described a larger-than-normal mailout of notices of value this year and proposed asking appellants and county staff to provide hearing evidence seven days before a scheduled appeal.

Board members opened the meeting by introducing themselves. Randall Barnett, member of the Board of Equalization and Review, called for approval of the agenda and the consent items, and the board approved the consent agenda by voice vote.

A county staff member told the board that approximately 16,000 notices of value were on this year's list, an increase from the usual 10,000–12,000. The staff member said 4,000–5,000 of the additional notices may be attributable to hurricane damage assessments and that fewer than 200 informal real estate appeals were received this cycle. The staff member attributed the low number of informal appeals in part to proactive assessments done by the county.

The discussion then turned to updated bylaws and hearing procedures. A staff drafter who prepared the edits reduced the bylaws from about nine pages to seven and made language changes intended to replace discretionary terms such as "may" with more definitive language such as "shall." The drafter said many procedural details (for example, timing and format of evidence) are better placed in a separate hearing-procedures document that would be provided at a future meeting.

The bylaws include a defined “good cause” provision intended to guide decisions about excusing participants or continuing hearings when exceptional circumstances arise. The drafter and board members discussed the practical effect of that provision and other procedural points.

Board members debated how to handle new evidence presented shortly before a hearing. The staff drafter proposed a practice—likely to be codified in hearing procedures rather than the bylaws—asking both appellants and county staff to file evidence seven days before a scheduled hearing so members have time to review it. The drafter said the board retains discretion to accept late evidence or continue a hearing, but the seven-day expectation would reduce last-minute submissions such as lengthy appraisals presented the day of a hearing.

Members also asked about time limits for oral testimony. A county staff member warned that imposing fixed time limits in quasi‑judicial appeals could raise due-process concerns, and said the chair and board have discretion to manage repetitive or cumulative testimony.

After discussion, a motion to adopt the revised bylaws was made and seconded; the board voted in favor without objection.

The meeting closed with a motion to adjourn that passed by voice vote.

The board indicated the written hearing procedures and the formalized prehearing evidence timeline will be circulated for review at a future meeting.