Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appeal Hearing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Caller disputes assessor’s comparables in appeal over 607 Northeast 15th Street valuation
Summary
An appellant, Jason Nations, told the Oklahoma County BOE he and his wife submitted additional comparables and an Excel spreadsheet showing lower neighborhood sales; the assessor said some cited sales were outside the allowable date range or were apartment sales and explained square-footage and condition adjustments. The panel did not make a final decision at the hearing and said it would meet to rule later.
Jason Nations, who identified himself during the call, appeared before the Oklahoma County Board of Equalization to contest the assessor’s valuation for 607 Northeast 15th Street, arguing that the assessor’s comparables and adjustment process produced an inflated estimate.
Nations told the panel he and his wife had submitted two different sets of comparables and a spreadsheet listing 12 sales within the assessor’s allowable date range. "If you'll also note that one of the attachments that my wife shared was an Excel document that listed off 12 different comparables that have sold inside the time range the assessor provided," he said. He asked the board to consider those additional sales.
The assessor’s representative replied that the office had used a set of six comparables and that some sales the appellant cited were ineligible because of sale date or because the sale involved an apartment complex. The assessor described how the office makes adjustments to account for square footage, age and condition and said those adjustments drove the appraised value. "When the homes have significantly different square footage ... that's how we get ... the adjustments we make to see what value we need to try and get," the assessor said.
Board members asked clarifying questions about which comparables were removed for date-range reasons and whether the assessor’s software and mass-appraisal process applied consistent methodologies across the neighborhood. One panel member noted the process is "a science and an art" and said the three members would use their professional judgment to arrive at a fair value.
The panel did not announce a final valuation at the hearing. Staff told the caller that the board would meet and make a written decision and that the appellant would be notified by mail.
The hearing record shows the board invited the appellant to resend the 12-comparable spreadsheet to ensure the panel had visibility before making its decision.
