Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Warrick County board denies multiple assessment appeals, grants farm exemption and reinstates homestead
Loading...
Summary
At its Dec. 16 meeting, the Warrick County Board of Tax Appeals granted a 15-acre agricultural exemption, denied several appeals for lack of required documentation, tabled one homeowner appeal for a site visit and reinstated a homestead exemption after testimony from the owner.
The Warrick County Board of Tax Appeals heard more than a dozen property-assessment appeals on Dec. 16, 2025, and issued a mix of rulings: it approved a 15-acre agricultural exemption, denied multiple appeals for insufficient evidence, tabled at least one case pending a site visit and paperwork, and reinstated a homestead deduction after live testimony.
Many petitioners told the board they believe recent reassessments overstate their properties’ market value. Terry Philopy, the owner of 102 West Locust, told the board his homestead exemption had been removed after the auditor received information suggesting he did not live at the property. “102 West Locust is my legal address — I receive my mail there and I’m in and out every single day,” Philopy said. After discussion, the board moved to reinstate his homestead deduction for that address and instructed staff on next steps for any factual corrections to building square footage.
The board voted to grant an agricultural classification for a 15-acre parcel that petitioners said had been purchased and maintained as farm ground for decades. The petitioner argued the assessor’s office had reclassified portions of a long-held farm as residential (91 RR) despite maps and FSA/USDA records showing non-tillable and forested acreage. After staff reviewed documents and the petitioner’s testimony, a board member moved to apply the agricultural exemption for the 15 acres; the motion carried by voice vote.
Not every petition succeeded. Petitioner Alex (Alexi) Popoff challenged a 2025 assessment that rose from a 2024 value of roughly $113,700 to $169,000 and said he could supply leases for rental income valuation. Assessor staff said they had not received an executed lease and explained that income-and-expense valuation depends on documented, signed leases; lacking the required documentation, the board voted to deny the appeal.
Similarly, several other appeals were denied or the assessor’s recommendation was upheld where petitioners had not supplied required evidence such as executed leases, property-specific timber-management plans signed by a registered DNR forester, or comparable sales. For a number of woodland and timber-management appeals, staff told owners that a property-specific management plan signed by a professional forester or a registered timber buyer is necessary to establish active woodland management for preferential classification.
Where petitioners were unable or unwilling to allow a site visit, the board often recommended — and in one case tabled an appeal — to permit staff to inspect the property before any final change. One homeowner who described a 19th-century house with limited modern upgrades said she was uncomfortable inviting an inspector inside; the board urged her to file homestead paperwork and offered to schedule an exterior site visit to assess obsolescence and deferred maintenance.
Board members repeatedly referenced limits imposed by state decisions. For at least one large-acreage case the board said it was bound by a prior determination from the Indiana Board of Tax Review (IBTR), which froze the parcel’s current value for the assessment cycle; local review therefore could not alter that case’s assessment for this year.
What the board asked petitioners to do next varied by case: remove derelict structures and file a notice for reinspection to restore agricultural rates; provide executed leases and income documentation to support income-based valuations; or obtain DNR-registered forester signoff for timber-management plans. Staff repeatedly advised petitioners that assessments are effective on Jan. 1 and that any factual-correction filings should be prioritized to affect the next assessment cycle.
The board closed the session after handling the remaining appeals and giving staff directions on follow-up items. Petitioners will receive written notices of the board’s actions and of the paperwork or filings required to pursue further appeals or corrections.
Votes at a glance (selected items) - Agricultural exemption (15 acres): motion to grant carried (motion introduced SEG 323; passed SEG 338). Quote from petitioner Moseman: “This parcel should continue to be classified as agricultural as it was purchased for agricultural use.” - Homeowner appeal tabled for site visit and homestead follow-up: motion carried (motion introduced SEG 814; passed SEG 888). Staff advised filing homestead paperwork by year-end to affect the next tax year. - Alex Popoff (duplex) appeal: motion to deny for lack of executed lease/documentation (motion introduced SEG 1406; passed SEG 1416). Assessor staff noted an absence of a signed lease needed for income-and-expense valuation. - Homestead reinstated for 102 West Locust (Terry Philopy): motion to reinstate carried (motion introduced SEG 3748; passed SEG 3753). Philopy testified that the property is his legal residence.
The board’s staff told petitioners how to submit correction-of-error forms, how to document structure removals, and when to contact Newburgh or Booneville assessor offices for local follow-up. Several cases were noted as likely to proceed to the Indiana Board of Tax Review if petitioners sought further review.
The board adjourned after its final votes; staff will send formal written notices to parties about the decisions and any steps needed for future filings.
