Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Reassessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Shenandoah County reassessment draws public outcry as commissioner urges informal reviews
Summary
Commissioner of Revenue Missy Hockman outlined the county'026 general reassessment process and appeal steps; dozens of residents at the Jan. 13 Board of Supervisors meeting said increases of 24%–43% for some properties are causing alarm and called for greater transparency and data on informal review outcomes.
Commissioner of Revenue Missy Hockman told the Shenandoah County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 13 that the 2026 general reassessment, conducted by Vision Government Solutions, used about 2,000 qualified sales between 2023 and 2025 to value roughly 33,000 parcels across the county and that the process is required by state law. "When values go up, the rate must come down," Hockman said, explaining that the county must equalize the tax rate to keep total revenue close to prior years.
Hockman said the reassessment is a mass appraisal intended to reach "as close to 100% fair market value as possible," and outlined the appeal pathway: an informal review with the reassessment firm (currently scheduled through Friday, Jan. 23), Board of Equalization hearings in mid to late March, and then circuit‑court appeals. She encouraged residents to schedule informal reviews and bring property documentation so that errors can be corrected during that stage.
Residents who spoke during the meeting nd at public comment expressed frustration with increases they said were large and opaque. Tina Williams of Edinburg said her parcel's assessed value rose about 35%, adding that an informal review she attended on Jan. 9 did not disclose the firm—ederal comparables or valuation methods: "The representative —en —ould not provide specific values, comparables, or the derivation methods used to determine our assessment," Williams told the board. She said the increase of about $140,000 would be hard to absorb on a fixed income and asked how additional revenue would be used.
Other speakers raised stronger accusations. Daryl Bates said multiple parcels he owns rose dramatically and called the assessments "malfeasance if you know and you assess something that you know is wrong." Brad Pollack told the board he believes the reassessment contract was wasteful and possibly unlawful and urged the board to consider spending cuts as an alternative to increased tax burdens.
Board members asked staff to capture data from informal reviews and report back on the volume and outcomes of those appointments; Hockman said the firm is making corrections when mistakes are identified but did not provide a completed tally during the meeting. Several supervisors urged residents to use the informal review first and to collect photo and comparable evidence ahead of any Board of Equalization or court proceedings.
The board did not take any formal action on reassessment policy during the meeting. Hockman and reassessment staff were available after the meeting in the hallway to help residents schedule reviews and answer individual questions.
