Washoe BOE trims 2025 land value for one Meadowood parcel but upholds broader appraisals after appeal

Washoe County Board of Equalization · February 18, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a Feb. 18 Washoe County Board of Equalization hearing, the board reduced the 2025 land value for parcel 04016252 to $15 per square foot but later upheld the assessor's appraisals for multiple Crossings at Meadowood parcels after considering comparables and assessor analyses.

The Washoe County Board of Equalization on Feb. 18 reviewed commercial valuation appeals for the Crossings at Meadowood shopping center and took two split actions: it lowered the land value for one 2025 parcel and later upheld the assessor's appraisal for several related 2026 parcels.

Diana Arias, an appraiser with the Washoe County Assessor's Office, told the board the subject property includes a 31,301-square-foot discount store (built 1989) and a 3,928-square-foot fast-food building added in 2023. "The subject property is a 31,301 square foot discount store built in 1989 and a 3,928 square foot fast food restaurant built in 2023," Arias said in her presentation of the assessor's sales- and income-approach analyses.

Appellant representative Mike Churchfield argued the parcels were out of equalization. Churchfield pointed to constrained ingress and egress, limited dock access and lower interior build-outs at the SkiPro/Trek building and other line-space units, saying those functional constraints limit the site's ability to attract higher-credit, corporate tenants. "This is an equalization appeal," Churchfield said, arguing comparables such as Fire Creek Crossing, Ulta (Redfield Promenade) and Home Depot show lower per-square-foot land values for sites with better access and higher-built improvements.

Arias and assessor staff responded with recent land-sales data and mass-appraisal logic. The assessor cited several verified land sales on South Virginia Street (including one sale identified at $27.16 per square foot and another higher, vacant sale used as a nearby indicator) and explained the office's methodology: land is valued as vacant and grouped by corridor and parcel-size bands, while building replacement costs are derived from Marshall & Swift and then depreciated. "We value the land as though it's vacant," the assessor's office said during the presentation, explaining pad-site base values and larger-parcel adjustments.

Board members pressed for clarifying details. Staff confirmed the Panera building on the site measures 3,928 square feet and that the assessor's analysis used an approximate $900,000 new-construction value for that building. The assessor also said income-and-expense figures requested from the appellant were not provided; accordingly, the office relied on market rents and conservative cap-rate assumptions in the income approach.

Outcome 1 — reopened 2025 hearing, parcel 04016252: after oral argument and counsel's presentations, the board took a procedural motion addressing the reopened-2025 appeal for parcel 04016252. The board voted to keep the improvement (building) valuation unchanged and reduce the parcel's land value to $15 per square foot for tax year 2025 (the land-only figure stated in the motion was $1,773,375). The motion carried on a voice vote.

Outcome 2 — 2026 hearings, multiple parcels (04016250–53): the board then considered the 2026 appeals for the broader set of parcels that make up the Crossings at Meadowood center. After extended deliberation on how quality-class distinctions, parcel size, frontage and mass-appraisal mapping affect values, a board member moved to uphold the assessor's appraisal for the parcels named in the hearing and to find the petitioners had not met their burden to show unequal valuation. The motion carried on a voice vote.

The board also approved routine items on the agenda: withdrawals of two parcels that had been marked green on the agenda and several stipulations and role-change requests (RCR decreases) submitted by the assessor's office.

What this means: the board's split result leaves one 2025 parcel with a lower land value while upholding the assessor's mass-appraisal values across the center for the 2026 cycle. Appellants retain the right to pursue a further appeal to the Nevada State Board of Equalization if they wish. The board adjourned after completing the scheduled items.