Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Appraisal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appraisal district apologizes after Freeport exemption dropped from Tyson account, county told
Summary
The county's appraisal district said a manual owner‑ID change deleted a Freeport exemption worth $69,823,450 from a Tyson Foods account before certification; the chief appraiser apologized and described new checks to prevent future errors.
The Potter County appraisal district told the commissioners on Feb. 9 that a clerical change to an owner ID removed a Freeport exemption that should have reduced taxable value for a Tyson Foods account.
"I wanted to personally apologize to the court, to the taxing units for this error," the district chief appraiser said, describing how a manual change to an owner ID deleted an exemption already on the account. He said the Freeport exemption in question should have been $69,823,450 and that the change caused certified values to be higher than they should have been.
The appraiser described the technical sequence: the district imported appraisal data from its vendor, observed a mismatched owner ID, and manually edited the record to consolidate owner accounts on a top‑20 taxpayer report; that manual change removed the exemption and the district did not correct it before certifying values.
He gave the court certifiable totals: the 2025 certified market value on the account was recorded as $192,934,710, and the corrected taxable value should be lower by the Freeport exemption amount. He said the corrected taxable value for the affected account is reflected in the district's records after the change was made.
To reduce recurrence, the chief appraiser outlined multiple reforms the office will implement: an additional verification pass before certification, an extra review for properties with market value greater than $5,000,000, new software warnings that manual owner changes do not automatically move exemptions, and added comparison reports that flag large percent changes in taxing‑unit totals.
Commissioners pressed on practical effects and fairness. One commissioner asked why the county would "take the brunt" of the change rather than another unit; the appraiser replied the tax code allows post‑certification corrections and that tax dollars flow to whichever taxing unit ultimately collects them after adjustments.
The appraiser said this is the largest clerical error his office has had during his certification tenure and said staff will add more checks to the roughly 100 automated and 40 system checks the district already runs.
The court accepted the explanation and the apology; staff said they will continue to provide updated certification documents to taxing units as corrections are processed.
