Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appeals Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board staff outlines appeals backlog and launches case‑management, prescheduling tracks
Summary
At a State Board of Equalization meeting, staff presented an annual appeals update saying the Assessment Appeals Commission is closed, roughly 7,000 parcel‑year appeals are pending (about 1,000 timeshares), and new case‑management and prescheduling processes aim to reduce time to hearing and settle more cases administratively.
Unidentified Speaker 2, a staff presenter, told the State Board of Equalization that the Assessment Appeals Commission has been closed and staff is shifting to new processes to move a large backlog of appeals.
"Our Assessment Appeals Commission is officially closed," Unidentified Speaker 2 said, and described options for parties who wish to continue challenging decisions: petition the board for review or appeal to Chancery Court. He said staff has formalized filing requirements — filing the appeal, providing the full administrative record and recordings, and allowing time for staff to notify parties — to make the board agenda manageable.
The update included a snapshot of the board’s inventory and operations through Nov. 1, 2024. Staff reported roughly 7,000 parcel‑tax‑year appeals pending, of which about 1,000 are timeshare related, leaving an active non‑timeshare appeal base of roughly 5,330 parcels. Of that group, about 600 parcels were already on track to contested‑case hearings or recently settled or withdrawn and awaiting processing. Administrative Procedures staff issued 562 orders this year; Unidentified Speaker 2 said "100% of those were issued on time or early," with an average of 17 days early.
To reduce delays, staff introduced two operational tracks. The first, a case‑management track, pairs appeals that have cycled through multiple status conferences with an SBUE staff attorney to set deadlines, follow up more proactively, and remove obstacles short of a contested‑case hearing. "It's reserved for appeals who've been through several status conferences," Unidentified Speaker 2 said, describing the goal as helping parties reach readiness or settlement without wasting contested hearing dates.
The second track is a prescheduling conference for appeals that are ready for hearing but do not want to wait for the next general scheduling conference; an appeals coordinator will work with parties to set mutually agreeable hearing dates.
Unidentified Speaker 2 also discussed trends in case type and representation: residential cases make up a disproportionate share of hours spent in hearings even though they are a minority of filings, most filings are represented by attorneys or registered agents, and there are relatively few self‑represented appellants (about 39). He noted concentration of volume in a small number of counties and representatives, citing Davidson County and a small set of firms and registered agents that together account for a very large share of pending appeals.
On timeshare cases, staff said the Tennessee Supreme Court recently issued a decision affecting classification issues in Sevier County and that similar issues can recur each tax year because tax‑year appeals are treated independently.
Unidentified Speaker 1 asked for a percentage of filed cases that proceed to a hearing. Unidentified Speaker 2 said he did not have a prepared percentage available and would follow up with a specific figure.
The board approved the meeting minutes by voice vote earlier in the session; no roll call or detailed vote tally was recorded, and the presenter offered to circulate additional statistics on rates of appeals that reach hearing. The meeting then adjourned.
