Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Franklin County Board of Equalization sustains $934,200 assessment for Clayton home
Summary
The Franklin County Board of Equalization sustained the assessor's $934,200 valuation for a 2017 custom home owned by Kevin and Rachel Clayton after the assessor's office presented sales‑comparison data and answered board questions about condition and comparable adjustments.
The Franklin County Board of Equalization on Dec. 11, 2025, sustained the assessor’s $934,200 valuation for a residential parcel owned by Kevin and Rachel Clayton.
The decision follows a presentation by an assessor’s appraiser who told the board the office’s valuation ‘‘stands at 934 and change’’ and is supported by four bracketed sales, a field review on Oct. 29, 2025, and neighborhood statistics showing a median price per square foot that brackets the subject property. The appraiser described the property as a custom home built in 2017 with roughly 2,900 livable square feet and an average condition.
Board members pressed the assessor’s representative about how construction quality and interior finishes factor into Marshall & Swift cost modeling and asked why an adjustment for a detached garage was not shown on one comparable. The assessor’s presenter said Marshall & Swift factors consider both structural quality and interior finishes, acknowledged that staff do not always inspect interiors for every mass appraisal case, and noted an omission in the written packet regarding how a detached garage adjustment was applied; the assessor confirmed the adjusted per‑square‑foot figure after removing the detached garage was $3.35.
The assessor stated the appellant had provided additional comparables but that the assessor’s office found its own neighborhood sales — including sales from Archer Estates and Spencer Estates — to be appropriate brackets; the assessor said the difference in values in the appellant’s comparables reflected land differences rather than improvement values. The board closed the hearing and later announced it would sustain the assessor’s value. A written decision will be issued within four weeks and is appealable to the State Board of Tax Appeals.
The hearing record shows the appellant did not appear in person; the assessor presented first as permitted by the board’s procedures. The board’s oral announcement sustaining the assessment was read at the close of the session.
