County of Webster v. Nebraska Tax Equal. & Rev. Comm.
296 Neb. 751
| Neb. | 2017Background
- Webster County’s assessor filed 2016 assessment abstracts; Nebraska’s Property Tax Administrator (Administrator) reviewed and recommended a 9% upward adjustment to the "Majority Land Use — Grass" subclass and explained sales in adjacent counties were used because Webster’s in-county sales were insufficient.
- TERC issued a show-cause order and held a hearing; the Administrator’s statistical/narrative reports (based on the sales file and a 3-year study period) informed TERC’s analysis.
- The County’s assessor challenged inclusion of four out-of-county grassland sales and three in-county sales the assessor had disqualified (two converted to cropland, one partly wooded parcel in Nuckolls County).
- At hearing the assessment division’s specialist defended use of the out-of-county and partly wooded sale (timber over grazing can still be classified as grassland); the assessor failed to produce evidence showing noncomparability (e.g., different rainfall).
- TERC adopted an intermediate adjustment (6% increase) to bring majority-grass level to 72% and overall agricultural land to 69%; Webster County appealed arguing the Administrator’s reports lacked sufficient underlying sale-by-sale data and included noncomparable sales.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Webster County) | Defendant's Argument (TERC/Administrator) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether TERC erred by relying on the Administrator’s statistical/narrative reports without including each sale’s raw sales-file data | §77-5016(4) requires records TERC relies upon be in the record; Administrator should list each sale, price, assessed value, and geography | §77-5027(3) does not require itemized sales in the report; statute/regulatory scheme provides access to sales file and a show-cause hearing to contest specifics | Reports containing statistical and narrative analyses are competent evidence; TERC may rely on them without attaching every sale’s sales-file entry |
| Whether assessment division improperly used noncomparable out-of-county or partly wooded sales | Inclusion of Nuckolls (partly wooded) sale and other out-of-county sales produced a distorted level of value | Administrator may use comparable sales from similar market areas or adjacent counties; timber-over-grass parcels may still be classified/used as grassland per division rules | Webster failed to prove the sales were noncomparable; the disputed Nuckolls parcel was properly used and county produced no contrary evidence |
| Burden of proof at a show-cause hearing to contest Administrator’s report | Administrator must prove each sale is comparable in the report | County must show why TERC should not rely on the Administrator’s reports at the show-cause hearing; access to sales files available on request | At show-cause hearing the county bears the burden to demonstrate TERC should not rely on Administrator’s reports |
Key Cases Cited
- JQH La Vista Conf. Ctr. v. Sarpy Cty. Bd. of Equal., 285 Neb. 120 (standard of appellate review for TERC final decisions)
- Brenner v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal., 276 Neb. 275 (arbitrary agency action defined; deference framework)
- Blakely v. Lancaster County, 284 Neb. 659 (agency action must conform to law; questions of law reviewed de novo)
- In re Guardianship & Conservatorship of Kaiser, 295 Neb. 532 (statutory interpretation as question of law)
- Johnson v. Neth, 276 Neb. 886 (presumption that public officers faithfully perform duties)