Krings v. Garfield Cty. Bd. of Equal., 835 N.W.2d 750

Landowner Ladd D. Krings owns two contiguous Garfield County parcels (480 acres), largely encumbered by a Wetlands Reserve Program easement allowing conservation uses and limited compatible uses.
County assessor set 2010 assessed values at $39,895 and $258,845; Krings protested seeking lower values; county Board of Equalization adopted the assessor’s values and denied reductions.
TERC concluded Krings’ land was not agricultural or horticultural under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 77‑1359 and therefore should be assessed at actual value (not at the special agricultural class rate).
TERC nonetheless attempted to "equalize" Krings’ nonagricultural/nonhorticultural land with agricultural/horticultural land in the county after finding the county’s ag/hort land had been assessed at 70% instead of the statutory 75%, and reduced Krings’ assessed values accordingly.
The Department of Revenue appealed to the Nebraska Supreme Court, agreeing Krings’ land is nonagricultural but arguing TERC erred by equalizing nonagricultural land with agricultural land and by addressing the county assessor’s alleged 70% assessment.

Issue	Department (appellant) argument	Krings/Board argument	Held
Whether TERC may equalize nonagricultural/nonhorticultural property with agricultural/horticultural property	Equalization with ag/hort land was improper because Neb. Const. art. VIII, § 1(4) and statutes allow ag/hort land to be valued differently from other property	TERC treated county‑wide disparities by equalizing values across classes to achieve uniform taxation	Court: Reversed — TERC erred; ag/hort land is a constitutionally permitted separate class and nonagricultural land should not be equalized with it
Whether the county assessor improperly assessed agricultural/horticultural land at 70% instead of statutory 75%	TERC’s finding that assessor valued ag/hort land at 70% was incorrect and outside TERC’s proper scope here	TERC analyzed assessor practice and adjusted Krings’ values using that conclusion	Court: Not reached/subsumed — TERC’s comments on assessor practice exceeded the appeal’s scope and were unnecessary once equalization with ag/hort land was held improper

Republic Bank v. Lincoln Cty. Bd. of Equal., 283 Neb. 721 (establishes standard of review for TERC decisions)
Brenner v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal., 276 Neb. 275 (explains equalization purpose and uniformity requirement)
Bartlett v. Dawes Cty. Bd. of Equal., 259 Neb. 954 (ties county board duties to constitutional uniformity clause)
Kearney Convention Center v. Board of Equal., 216 Neb. 292 (prior equalization of nonag property with farmland — distinguished because constitutional amendment later changed treatment of ag land)
Banner County v. State Bd. of Equal., 226 Neb. 236 (discusses 1984 constitutional amendment and limits of uniformity principle)
State ex rel. Johnson v. Gale, 273 Neb. 889 (confirms plain meaning of constitutional provision)