Lincoln County Board of Equalization upholds most assessments, approves targeted cuts after 16 appeals

The Lincoln County Board of Equalization met April 21, 2026, to hear a docket of 16 property tax appeals brought by homeowners and businesses across the county. After presentations from the county assessors and testimony from property owners, commissioners voted on a series of individualized valuation changes and confirmations.

Carla Goen, Lincoln County director of equalization, opened the session with an overview of the appeals process, recent assessment tools and a new county regression model used to analyze market values. Goen said countywide assessments rose roughly 1–3% and that changes in state law (Senate Bill 154) will begin to classify some garages and accessory structures differently for owner-occupied parcels. "This is a parcel-by-parcel task," Goen told the board as she outlined the county's packet materials and the schedule for present-day hearings.

The board then moved through individual appeals. On parcel 09750.03.8 in Worthing (Ernest and Joan Stratmyer), the assessor recommended leaving the county valuation unchanged, noting heavy depreciation and floodplain comparables. In testimony, the Stratmyers said repeated flooding and changed drainage following county road work had severely damaged their home and yard; they asked for a drastic reduction or elimination of taxable value. After discussion the board declined an initial motion to zero the account but adopted a second motion to set the land value at $20,000 and the buildings at $0 (passed by roll call: Putnham, Utton, Errens — yes; Landine — no). The chair characterized the vote as aligning the county’s decision with evidence in the local-board minutes.

Several other owner-presented appeals led to adjustments. In Harrisburg, the board set new values for the property owned by Donald and Don Hoffman (parcel 0995032010), moving the land to $180,900, the house to $210,000 and accessory buildings to $40,000 after the owner described an apparent, localized market impact from nearby livestock operations. The motion passed on a roll call with Landine dissenting.

Commissioners also considered multiple residential acreage appeals in which appellants asked the board to account for farm-related impacts (noise, truck traffic, manure, dust). For parcel 0995003C100 (Benjamin and Katie Kappen), the board adopted a motion setting the house at $44,700 and the land at $60,000 after debate about comparability and the effect of nearby agricultural operations.

Commercial and income-producing property appeals prompted a mix of outcomes. The board heard from Tom McDow of Tantara Partners on an office building in Sioux Falls, who urged use of an income-capitalization approach; commissioners set the structure at $862,850 and the land at $213,400 after weighing the income evidence and market comparables. For JustRight Storage LLC, a previously unassessed 2019 storage building was discovered during the reappraisal; owner Josh Nielsen presented nearby comparables and the board reduced the structures value to $501,220 (land left at $222,500).

Multifamily appeals in Beresford (SNS Rentals) highlighted a divergence between county market-based assessments and the local board’s income-based decisions. Appellant Rod Tobin argued that rents and cap rates in Beersford are lower than in Sioux Falls and asked the county to use a lower cap rate. The county adopted the local board's lower valuation for one parcel (8-unit property) and kept assessor recommendations for a sister 4-unit parcel after separate motions.

A mixed-use property with novel, high-amenity storage units and a shopping center (Ano Visa LLC) generated extended discussion. Owner/builder Vic Patel said some units leased for roughly $2,000 per month but that many units remained vacant since construction. Commissioners sought a compromise between assessor and appellant figures and reduced the storage-building assessment to $1.75 million while leaving the land and shopping-center assessments essentially unchanged.

At the Dakota Spirit recreational facility appeal, founder Robin French and an associate argued neighboring parcel conditions and tenant departures did not support the assessor’s large land increases. Commissioners adopted a compromise that lowered the county’s most recent land valuation and set the combined value below the assessor’s submitted total.

Three Holiday Station convenience-store parcels in the Sioux Falls area were also reviewed; for each the board accepted the assessor’s replacement-cost methodology (replacement cost new less depreciation and condition) and voted to leave those assessments unchanged.

What the board decided

- The board considered each appeal individually and recorded roll-call votes on motions to affirm or change assessor values. Several residential appeals led to modest reductions; at least one flood-impacted property (Stratmyer) was adjusted to land $20,000 and buildings $0. Several commercial appeals were adjusted after owners supplied income or lease evidence or when the assessor discovered previously unassessed improvements.

- Commissioners repeatedly noted that any adjustment applies only to the current assessment year; reductions do not carry forward automatically to future assessment years.

Why it matters

Property valuations determine local tax bills and depend on method (market comparables, cost-based replacement, and income-capitalization). The board balanced assessor models, recent sales, income data provided by owners, and local-board findings. Several decisions turned on whether county comparables reflected local economic realities (for example, Beersford versus Sioux Falls) and on tangible site conditions like flood risk or persistent drainage problems.

Next steps

Most decisions were final for this session; a few items were scheduled for May 5 consent action (elderly/disabled freeze lists, veteran exemptions and removals of owner-occupied status where applicable). The board recessed at the close of the docket.

Reported quotes

"We will have to look at every single parcel," Carla Goen said, explaining implementation of the new owner-occupied classification rules stemming from recent state law changes.

Appellant Ernest Stratmyer told commissioners, "We've dealt with this for 30 years...we had the water in the house in 2014 and 2024," asking for relief tied to repeated flooding he blamed on drainage changes.

A commissioner summarized the board’s stance on the Stratmyer appeal: the motion to set the land at $20,000 and buildings at $0 "does carry," after roll-call voting.

Methodology note

Where owners presented credible, consistent income records (rent rolls, audited income statements) commissioners sometimes relied on income-capitalization arguments or blended approaches; where rent and income submissions were contradictory the assessors tended to rely on sales and cost approaches and to recommend no change.

The board meets again for remaining appeals and administrative consent items on May 5, per the assessor’s schedule.

(Reporting based only on the county’s April 21, 2026 meeting transcript and the evidence presented there.)