Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Residential Appeal topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board sets contested property value at $1.3 million after owner objects to assessor’s comps

Board of Equalization of Oklahoma County · May 4, 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

After an extended hearing in which the owner accused the assessor of cherry‑picking comparables and denying an in‑person informal hearing, the Board of Equalization agreed to set the fair‑market value of a newly built home at $1.3 million by mutual consent.

The Oklahoma County Board of Equalization agreed on May 4 to set the fair‑market value for the property at 801 Northwest 7 at $1,300,000 after an owner protest highlighted procedural and comparable‑selection concerns.

Owner Mr. Erdos told the board he had bought the lot for about $427,000 and spent substantial sums building an “excellent quality” house but disputed the assessor’s $1,684,000 notice. He said he was denied an in‑person informal hearing that he had requested and accused assessor staff of “cherry‑pick[ing]” high‑priced comparables and even using the same comp twice with different adjusted values. “We were denied what I think is due process,” he told the panel.

Assessor staff explained the office’s inventory‑modification and new‑construction calculations, cited sale and construction data that supported a higher median and mean value, and acknowledged some adjustments based on the informal review. Board members asked the assessor to recompute values removing the duplicated comp; after discussion, the board moved and seconded to set the value at $1,300,000 by agreement of the parties.

The motion was made and seconded during the hearing; the board announced the agreed fair‑market value and said a written notice would be mailed after the Friday decisions were finalized. The record shows the owner pressed both substantive valuation points (which comps were used and how permit/construction costs were treated) and a procedural objection about the informal hearing format.