County of Franklin v. Tax Equal. & Rev. Comm.
892 N.W.2d 142
Neb.2017Background
- Franklin County assessor filed county assessment abstracts; the State Property Tax Administrator (PTA) reviewed and issued reports recommending an 8% increase to agricultural (grassland) valuations.
- Because Franklin County had few in-county grassland sales, the PTA included comparable sales from other counties (19 total sales: 9 in-county, 10 out-of-county) producing a median level of value of 66.61%.
- The county assessor (Dallman) used a smaller comparable sample (14 sales: same 9 in-county, 5 out-of-county) excluding some sales more than 12 miles away, producing a median of 74.91% within the statutory acceptable range (69–75%).
- TERC held a show-cause hearing, considered both county and PTA evidence, and found the PTA’s statistics persuasive; TERC ordered an 8% upward adjustment of the Land Use Grass subclass to reach the 75% target.
- Franklin County appealed, arguing TERC improperly relied on PTA statistics and out-of-county sales, failed to uniformly and proportionally equalize statewide values, erred in the 8% adjustment, and improperly denied reconsideration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Franklin County) | Defendant's Argument (TERC/PTA) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether TERC erred by relying on PTA statistics including distant comparable sales | PTA used noncomparable sales beyond 12 miles; county figures entitled to presumption of correctness | PTA is statutorily authorized to provide opinions and comparable sales from other counties; TERC may consider PTA data and all hearing evidence | TERC properly considered PTA statistics and comparable out-of-county sales; no error |
| Whether county assessment figures are presumptively correct such that TERC must defer | County asserts its entered figures are presumed correct under administrative rule | TERC may use all information at hearing; the presumption does not bar use of PTA comparables | The presumption was inapplicable to the disputed out-of-county comparables; TERC did not err |
| Whether TERC violated uniformity/proportionality under Neb. Const. art. VIII by unequal grassland valuations statewide | Differences in county grassland medians show failure to uniformly/proportionally equalize | Variations alone without context are insufficient; TERC’s statutory process aims at bringing classes into acceptable ranges | No evidence TERC violated uniformity; assignment without merit |
| Whether the 8% upward adjustment and denial of reconsideration were arbitrary or unsupported | Adjustment was improper and arbitrary given county’s sample within statutory range | Record supports adjustment based on PTA’s median and statutory acceptable range; denial of reconsideration appropriate | Adjustment affirmed; denial of reconsideration affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- JQH La Vista Conf. Ctr. v. Sarpy Cty. Bd. of Equal., 285 Neb. 120, 825 N.W.2d 447 (2013) (discusses TERC authority and standards for review of valuation determinations)