Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Property Valuation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board sets disputed Cobblestone home's fair-market value at $360,000

Oklahoma County Board of Equalization · April 1, 2026
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

The Oklahoma County Board of Equalization agreed by party settlement to set a Cobblestone gated-community home's fair-market value at $360,000 after an owner provided recent photos and contractors' quotes the panel said it would add to the record.

The Oklahoma County Board of Equalization set the fair-market value of a home in the Cobblestone gated community at $360,000 after an appellant presented recent photos and estimates of deferred maintenance.

The homeowner, who did not give his name on the record, said the pictures were taken in the previous two to three weeks and showed roof damage, loose stonework around a pool, missing tile and other deferred-maintenance items he estimated at more than $150,000. "I bought the property as is," he said, adding that he and his wife plan long-term renovations.

An assessor's representative explained the office used a set of comparables and applied mean-based calculations and adjustments for square footage and condition. The assessor acknowledged the appraiser had not received the appellant’s photos before the informal review and said the office would note the condition and revisit adjustments in 2027. "We'll put a note on the account, and we'll probably be checking in with you to see when these repairs are done," the assessor said.

Panel members agreed by the parties' consent to set BOE item 24 at $360,000 and asked the homeowner to submit the photos for the hearing record. A motion to record the agreement was made, seconded and approved by the panel. The board noted that setting a value "by agreement" reflected the parties' resolution for the current appeal and did not guarantee the same valuation in future annual assessments.

The board closed that hearing item after placing the appellant’s photos into the record and moved on to other appeals on the docket.