Woods County board of equalization to hold special meeting after assessor says many assessment rolls not yet available

The Woods County Board of Equalization recessed its regular meeting on Tuesday and scheduled a special meeting to review assessment rolls after the county assessor said assessments submitted by taxpayers were not yet available for board review.

Commissioners repeatedly pressed the assessor and staff for access to assessments so they could meet statutory timetables. One commissioner cited the county manual language that "the county assessor is required to submit these applications to the county board of equalization by the fourth Monday in April," and asked staff to confirm why assessments had not been delivered. The assessor responded that many assessments were still being processed and that some mailed returns had not been posted.

Board members raised two recurring issues: delays in receiving mailed assessment returns and conflicting guidance about when the board may review or change valuations. Several commissioners pointed to March 17 as the statutory/postmark deadline for assessment filings and noted that some returns arrived late or were returned by the U.S. Postal Service as undeliverable despite appearing to be postmarked earlier. "If it's postmarked, though, we have to…accept it," one commissioner said, describing the county's liability for late‑postmarked filings.

The board discussed recent Attorney General guidance and an Oklahoma Tax Commission bulletin (referred to in meeting materials as bulletin number 9773) stating that the county board of equalization "may not adjust appraisals of property unless the adjustment is made in response to a protest filed as prescribed by law." Commissioners debated whether the AG opinion or their county manual controlled and whether the board had authority to review electronic assessment data beginning April 1.

Commissioners also questioned past legal decisions and the county’s handling of large valuation disputes. One commissioner said prior settlements and legal advice had put the county at risk and recommended the county secure dedicated legal counsel with subject‑matter expertise to represent the board in future valuation disputes, referencing a motel valuation matter and litigation involving a national retailer.

After extended discussion, a commissioner proposed calling a special meeting to review whatever assessments are available and begin the board’s review process; another commissioner seconded and the motion carried by voice vote. "If they didn't send it in and they didn't get it in time, that's their problem," a commissioner said when the board voted to convene a special session to start the review.

Why it matters: The timetable for reviewing assessment rolls affects the ability of the county to set taxable values, to notify property owners, and to meet subsequent protest and hearing deadlines. Commissioners said postal delays and statutory changes have pushed the county’s calendar and could delay budget and tax‑notice timelines if not addressed.

Next steps: The board recessed to set a date for a special meeting to review assessments and asked the assessor’s office to prepare available electronic assessment data. Commissioners asked staff to consult the Oklahoma Tax Commission and the state auditor/inspector for guidance and to identify outside legal counsel experienced in valuation litigation if needed.