Property tax talk is focus: Commission hears property value complaints

Property tax assessments for 2024 property taxes payable in 2025 in Custer County were recently mailed to property owners, and as such, property taxes were a large focus of conversation during the open forum time of the March 6 meeting of the Custer County Commission.
Among those who spoke was Andrea Lewis, who questioned the method the county’s equalization department uses to do property valuations—at least in her neighborhood of the county–saying the tiered system used was a blanket approach that didn’t achieve the taxing equality the department is tasked with.
Under the criteria used, the equalization department assigns a dollar value—in this case $65,000—to the first acre of land at a property, as it is typically the one with the home and utilities. That figure then drops incrementally for acres two through nine, 10 through 19, and anything over 20 acres is at a lower rate. Vissia said after the meeting this method is used because in the past when land was assessed per acre, the larger acreages were being overassessed. The change to the new system was implemented for the 2022 taxes paid in 2023.
Lewis said equalization has a choice of certain criteria to appraise the property, with the other choice being a value that is equal per acre as opposed to the tiered system.
“I’m also in real estate, and I’ve run all the sales from last year and those numbers don’t compute,” she said. “I understand they have to be applied to a ratio to be able to do the equalization. Even taking into consideration the Covid anomaly of market sales, the market now has gone down and is not justifying the tiered structure that exists.”
Lewis said anything in her township and range, the first acre is $65,000, adding she cannot find a sale that justifies that amount.
“The values of recent sales are coming in well under where we were being assessed at,” she said.
Lewis asked if the commission approves how the equalization department chooses to assess properties, saying there is a “night and day difference” in properties between many properties on the township and range she referenced. She said instead of blanketing the entire township certain areas should be considered, while adding subdivisions are not having the blanket approach given to them and are affecting comparable sales.
“The subdivision next door to me is paved roads, underground utilities and high-end houses,” Lewis said. “I’m being assessed the same values even though there are no comps in my area to justify that.
“By putting the blanket umbrella approach over the entire township the word equalization is thrown out the window.”
Commissioner Craig Hindle said the commission tries to use the appraisal approach that best benefits taxpayers, adding he hadn’t heard about the $65,000 first acre, but was told by other commissioners and director of equalization Leah Vissia it had been brought to the commission.
Lewis also touched on the county appraisal the equalization office began last year, saying she believed the process should have started in the City of Custer, which she said would have had the most overall affect on equalizing taxes. Lewis questioned doing the western part of the county first, and estimated it would be at least two years for the city to be done if the timeline was based on how long it took to do the parts assessed so far.
“I don’t see the county getting reassessed completely in the next six or seven years and it needs to be reassessed properly now so it can be equal,” she said.
Hindle said the reassessment only started last year, and it was determined the western side of the county needed the reassessment more than the towns, which can be done in the wintertime.
Hindle said the reason the equalization department is doing the assessment rather than having an outside company do the work is because it would have cost the county $1 million.
“So, we put two to four people on it as we can and basically save the taxpayers three quarters of a million dollars over five years,” he said. “A million dollars scared the hell out of us.”
Lewis asked if a million dollars to get things more equal now would make sense compared to some paying higher rates for the next series of years.
“I understand we have a budget to meet, but if only a portion of us are meeting the actual assessment and everything else is underassessed and it’s going to be that way the next six years, the timeline doesn’t add up for equality,” she said.
John Dvorak, who along with his wife owns Shady Rest Motel, started the discussion by saying he was at the meeting because his assessment had doubled over the past two years.
“That rate seems to be outrageous,” he said.
Dvorak said he was just beginning to learn about the assessment process, and asked to what extent the commission participates in the assessment process.
“We don’t have any, other than when you file a grievance we act as a board to determine if you are entitled to the grievance,” he said.
Hindle said changes to the way property taxes are handled are not getting much traction at the state level.
“It’s like pushing a chain,” he said. “We talk about it on a daily basis between us and citizens.”
Commissioner Mark Hartman said he would like to see the county do a resolution that states the county has a goal to get its property valued at 85 percent of full and true value, as required by the state, but set a limit on what percentage an assessment can go up each year, with the goal of a slow build to getting to the required percentage.
“It would be a huge benefit to the taxpayers,” he said. “It would take a lot of pressure off these people who are going up 30, 40 percent a year.”
“The system is broken, and that’s not anybody’s fault, because we are dealing with new circumstances we have never dealt with before,” Dvorak said. “That doesn’t mean we can’t fix it and make it easier and easier to live with and more transparent.”
County resident David Reid said the department of equalization was at his home every year reassessing the value, which was later disputed by Vissia. He also lamented another 14 percent increase to his property value, which Vissia attributed to change in the manual increase from 145 to 160 countywide, along with a refiguring of depreciation.
The manual is a costing manual that tells the equalization department how to assess a structure per square foot. The market dictates which manual level is used.
Former commissioner Jesse Sorenson said he brought what he believed to be a comparable sale to the equalization department for his home but was told it couldn’t be used because it wasn’t like his property, and then had another comparable sale rejected because it was in Pennington County.
“That doesn’t matter, it’s equal,” he said. “It doesn’t make sense to me. Everybody should be equal. If you live a mile apart it shouldn’t make a difference.”
He said a home in Fall River County that is much the same as his is assessed at a third of his home.
“It’s out of hand,” he said.
Commission chairman Jim Lintz said the idea of limiting the amount a property value can increase in a year has already been done by the state when it comes to agricultural land, but he wasn’t sure if it’s ever been attempted on the county level. The commission directed commission attorney Aaron Davis to investigate the matter further.