Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Appeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Albany County Board of Equalization denies SMBC Real Estate valuation appeal
Summary
The Albany County Board of Equalization denied a petition from SMBC Real Estate Holdings Company LLC to change the assessor’s 2025 valuation for parcel ID 16733323201600; the commissioners signed the decision and were reminded the parties have 30 days to file a notice of intent to appeal.
Hearing Examiner Josh Mercile announced on Oct. 1 that the Albany County Board of Equalization has denied SMBC Real Estate Holdings Company LLC’s petition to amend the Albany County Assessor’s 2025 valuation for parcel ID 16733323201600 at 756 North 3rd Street.
Mercile told the board that the written decision, which the commissioners reviewed and signed, concluded the petitioner’s arguments were “insufficient to overcome the presumption that the assessor did use a valid means to assess the property.” He said the dispute amounted to a difference of opinion on value, and under Wyoming law that difference does not by itself overturn an assessor’s valuation. “Therefore, we have denied the petitioner’s petition to amend the assessor’s valuation for the property in this case,” Mercile said.
The decision was introduced as docket number 2025-0001 and reflected the board acting in its capacity as the county board of equalization. Commissioners in the room confirmed their agreement with the decision letter and signed it. Mercile also told attendees that parties have 30 days from Oct. 1 to file a notice of intent to appeal; if no appeal is filed, the decision becomes final.
Earlier in the short special meeting the board formally closed public comments by motion, adopted the decision to uphold the assessor’s determination by motion and second, and then moved to adjourn. The meeting record shows the motions carried by voice vote with commissioners indicating agreement.
No additional legal citations or valuation specifics were read into the record beyond the finding that the petitioner failed to rebut the statutory presumption in favor of the assessor’s valuation. The hearing examiner indicated he had prepared a written decision letter and that commissioners had signed it; the record did not include further factual findings or a line-by-line summary of valuation evidence in open session.
The board’s action concludes this administrative stage unless SMBC Real Estate files an appeal within the statutory 30-day window.
