In Tennessee last week, taxpayers angry over taxation issuesstormed the state capitol, breaking a window and disrupting thelegislative session. Here in Lincoln County, no one stormed theGovernment Complex, but supervisors felt similar pressure fromproperty owners angry over increased property values following therelease of the 2001 reappraisal update.

The state-mandated reappraisal caught many property owners offguard when notices arrived in the mail last week. While few canhonestly dispute that property values have increased during therecent strong economy, nobody was ready for the amount ofincreases, which in some cases jumped 300 to 500 percent. Thehighest increases appear to have been property owners inside thecity limits.

The situation was not made any better by a poorly-worded andlate-arriving notice from the tax assessor’s office that suggesteda one week deadline to ask questions about the reappraisals. Addingmore fuel to the fire were questions about the company who did theappraisal and the absence this past week of Tax Collector-AssessorNancy Jordan, who was attending a state-mandated training sessionon the Gulf Coast.

We understand a specially-called public meeting of the Board ofSupervisors is being discussed for next week to allow Supervisorsto look into the situation before the August 6 deadline.

From our understanding, supervisors basically have threeoptions:

(1) Throw out the entire reappraisal and start over again, butthey have already spent $211,000 and will be under the scrutiny ofthe State Tax Commission.

(2) Accept the reappraisal as it sits, but face the scrutiny ofangry taxpayers.

(3) Make adjustments to individual land rolls where an error hasobviously been made, but face the scrutiny of property owners whoperceive they did not get equal treatment as their neighbors.

In order to participate in option number three, property ownersmust provide a written complaint to the chancery clerk’s office byAugust 6. According to state law, failure to do so forfeits theright to question the new valuations.

While county officials have no control over the market value ofproperty, they do have control on the millage rate that is used todetermine the amount of taxes to be collected. The next test forsupervisors after they solve the current problem will be at budgettime next month when they set millage rates. Those property ownerswhose values increased at a higher percentage than the percent themills might be decreased will find themselves paying highertaxes.

We suggest property owners who disagree with the valuationsremember to file the written complaint before August 6 and watchclosely as the 2002 budget is being prepared.

In Tennessee last week, taxpayers were successful in theirefforts.