Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax Title Dispute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owner disputes county tax acreage after warranty deed shows older recording; commissioners to investigate
Summary
Cindy Gibbons told the commission she and her family have paid taxes on 2.17 acres since 1966 but a 2024 tax notice shows just 0.75 acres and lists Brigham City as owner of the remainder; commissioners agreed to convene recorder, county attorney and a surveyor to resolve title and tax questions and review up to five years of potential tax adjustment under statute.
Cindy Gibbons brought an ownership and tax-notice discrepancy for parcel 03-030-011 to the commission Sept. 4, saying she has paid taxes on 2.17 acres since her family acquired the property in 1966 and that she purchased it from her father in 2015.
“It's showing 0.75 acres. But if you go back to 2023 it's 2.17 acres. So I’ve been paying for 2.17 acres,” Gibbons said, describing warranty-deed language and a recorded 1956 deed she and staff found in the recorder's office.
County staff and commissioners reviewed the deed language in the meeting record. Commissioners noted recorder and assessor offices had differing records; the county attorney and staff discussed options including surveying, convening a meeting with the recorder and relevant staff, and, if an error is confirmed, pursuing the statutory process for tax correction or possible reimbursement for up to five years where permitted by state law.
Unidentified commissioners raised procedural questions about whether Brigham City acquired the parcel historically via warranty deed and whether the assessor or recorder failed to propagate the recorded change to tax rolls. The transcript shows county staff proposing to set a follow-up meeting with the recorder's office, county attorneys and the landowner to reconcile deeds, assessor records and any survey results. Gibbons said she currently has a surveyor on site and documents of tax payments going back to her 2015 purchase and her father's ownership into the 1960s.
The commission did not change title or order a definitive refund at the meeting. Commissioners directed staff to research the chain-of-title, meet with the recorder and the county attorney's office, and to bring the property owner back before the commission once county staff have gathered records and survey information. Commissioners noted state statute limits tax corrections to a five-year window for refunds and suggested that potential reimbursements beyond that period are constrained by law.
Next steps listed by staff include assembling recorded deeds, clarifying whether a 1956 warranty deed conveyed any portion to Brigham City, confirming assessor records and survey results, and scheduling a follow-up meeting that will include county counsel and the recorder.
