Woods County equalization board presses assessor for company-level fair‑market values amid dispute over authority

Woods County commissioners approved routine appropriations and several freeport (in‑transit) exemptions, then reconvened as the county equalization board for a prolonged dispute in which board members demanded company‑specific fair‑market valuations from the county assessor.

The meeting opened with administrative business, including approval of March 18 minutes and the monthly appropriations. The board then approved several freeport exemptions, including filings by a value‑added product (assessed value read as $14,013), Baker Petrolite LLC (assessed value read as $14,057) and Cargill Incorporated (assessed value read as 229,476); a request from Black Hills Service Company (listed as gas-and-storage) was denied.

The substantive debate began when commissioners said they needed the assessor’s numbers for specific companies — repeatedly naming Target, Sim Gas and Energy Transfer — so the board could “make sure that all of those people are treated the same.” Chris, a committee member, told the assessor: “We want to see that you have treated them equally.” The assessor, Cindy, responded that the filings were still being processed and that some records arrive after the March 15 filing date; she told the board she did not have the requested company‑level figures immediately available: “I do not know off the top of my head.”

Board members disputed whether the assessment roll must be available to the board beginning April 1 or whether mailing and processing deadlines (and a later mailing window referenced by staff) allow the assessor additional time. Chris repeatedly cited what he read as statutory language requiring the assessment roll to be available electronically so the board can “correct and adjust the taxable value of the property” while in session. He pressed the point that the board can raise or lower reported fair‑market values to ensure equitable treatment and said the board’s oversight role requires those numbers in front of them.

The assessor and other staff pushed back, arguing the informal protest process and contractor (referred to in the record as Jerry or an outside appraiser) play roles in evaluating values, and that the board may not unilaterally change numbers without appropriate basis. Cindy said many filings are not final because contractors and companies are still submitting information; she also noted penalty windows for late filings (10% penalty, rising to 20% after the date discussed in the meeting).

Members also debated valuation methodology. Chris criticized use of an income approach in past pipeline assessments and said that approach produced large, disputed swings (he cited past numbers that moved from about 277 million to 113 million after settlement), arguing the board needs documentation of how each company’s value was derived (purchase price, sales comparison, income approach). He urged transparency and asked that the county’s consultant/appraiser share the underlying metrics — miles of pipe, compressors, equipment counts — so the board can verify that like companies are treated the same.

At several points board members recommended consulting the county attorney for a legal interpretation of Section 2842 (part B) and the timing question. The board directed staff to provide the company‑level numbers and to have the contractor/appraiser appear before the board when those figures are available. The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn; at least one member objected, indicating the dispute over access to valuation details remained unresolved.

Votes at a glance: - March 18 minutes: approved (voice vote). - Monthly appropriations (including the discovered ~$14 million): approved (voice vote). - Transfer/acknowledgements to highway CIRB personal services and a $20,000 transfer to rural fire sales tax: acknowledged/approved as read. - Fund 7301 responsibility changed from court clerk to district attorney: approved. - Value‑added product freeport exemptions (assessed value read as $14,013): approved. - Baker Petrolite LLC freeport exemption (assessed value read as $14,057): approved. - Cargill Incorporated freeport exemption (assessed value read as 229,476): approved. - Black Hills Service Company (gas and storage) exemption: denied based on prior court rulings that such operations are taxable.

What happens next: The board asked staff to deliver company‑level fair‑market values and to have the county’s contractor/appraiser (Jerry) present his assessments at a future session; members also recommended obtaining a legal opinion on the board’s authority and the timing for review. No formal change to any company’s valuation was made during the meeting.

Quotes (representative): "We want to see that you have treated them equally," Chris said, pressing the assessor for company figures. "I do not know off the top of my head," Cindy, the assessor, replied when asked for company‑specific numbers. "We're trying to protect you," Joe said, urging oversight of the assessor's work to ensure fairness.

(Reporting note: Speakers are identified as they appear in the official transcript by first name; where a role is explicit the role is shown. The article does not infer last names or titles beyond what the transcript provides.)