Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Reassessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tift County residents press concerns over GMAS reassessment as staff outline appeals, 8% certification rule
Summary
At a county workshop, residents criticized a GMAS mass appraisal and county staff explained the Department of Revenue sales-ratio review, an 8% appeals threshold that can delay billing, and rollback mechanics that will determine final millage and taxpayer bills.
At a Tift County workshop June 6, residents and county staff debated the results of a recent mass appraisal performed by GMAS and outlined how the appeals process, state sales-ratio rules and the rollback calculation will shape final tax bills.
Resident Jonathan Garvey told the board the reassessment was "a mess," saying he saw "values on identical homes" differing by large amounts and urging the county to scrutinize the contractor’s work. County staff replied that the Georgia Department of Revenue oversees appraisal uniformity and that a post-appeal sales-ratio study — comparing pre-appeal and post-appeal valuations — is the primary way to evaluate whether the mass appraisal met state tolerances.
Staff said the appeals filing window runs through August and explained a certification threshold: if appeals exceed about 8% of parcels or 8% of dollar value of the digest, the county cannot certify the digest or send tax bills until appeals reduce below that threshold. County staff reported that, of roughly 19,315 parcels in the county, about 1,300–1,500 appeals were pending earlier the morning of the workshop and roughly 600 appeals had been resolved via meetings with assessing staff; overall staff estimated roughly 2,000 appeals have been filed so far.
Officials also said GMAS was the only responsive bidder on the contract under state procurement rules, and that the Department of Revenue told staff it had not flagged a history of flawed mass appraisals by GMAS. Staff emphasized that the sales-ratio report produced after appeals are resolved will show whether the appraisal met state standards.
Staff walked through why the county performed the mass appraisal: state law requires the digest to approximate 40% of fair market value (with an acceptable range roughly 36%–44%). Staff said Tift County’s ratio declined during the COVID period, prompting a required rebalance to account for inflationary market growth. The county provided example numbers: last year’s millage rate was 11.853 mills; a June 6 snapshot produced an illustrative rollback of 8.11 mills. Staff explained the rollback mechanism limits the county to collect roughly the same total dollars as the prior year, so individual tax outcomes will vary — some property owners may see higher bills, some lower, and some unchanged — depending on changes in their assessed values.
No formal action was taken at the workshop; staff said appeals will continue through the statutory deadlines, a post-appeal sales-ratio study will be produced, and the digest will be certified and billed once it falls below the 8% threshold. Staff also offered to send residents a copy of the county budget on request to show department-level spending.
The county scheduled regular-session consideration of related items for Aug. 12; in the meantime staff will produce the post-appeal sales-ratio report and continue appeal hearings.
