Loading...
06-03-2025 Meeting Minutes ERPage 1 of 4 PERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION & REVIEW June 3, 2025 MEMBERS OTHERS PRESENT Margaret Bradsher, Chair Russell Jones, Tax Administrator David Newell Mike Kennedy, Real Property Appraisal Manager Larry King Lynn Brandon, Real Property Appraiser Frank Stoltmann Emmett Curl, Pearson Appraisal Service Sherry Wilborn, Commissioner Michelle Poole, Pers Property Appraisal Supervisor The Board of Equalization and Review for the County of Person, North Carolina, met on Tuesday June 3, 2025 at 9:00am in the Person County Tax Office Building in the conference room. Chairman Bradsher called the meeting to order at 9:00 am. The meeting began with the Pledge of Allegiance. The minutes from the May 27, 2025 meeting were reviewed. Mr. King made a motion to approve the minutes, Mr. Newell seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Review/motion to accept items on consent agenda – None at this time Review/motion to reject late filed appeals – None at this time The following appeals were heard by the board: Taxpayer: SMITH KEVIN VERDI (CASSANDRA TAYLOR) 9:05AM Map #: A72 12 Ms. Taylor opened by stating this parcel was their “Home place”. The property was inherited in 1993. The home needed repairs. The floors had bad water damage, damage from termites, and rental neglect. The house was vacant. Taxpayer could not find comparables. Zillow and Homes.com were presented to demonstrate market value. Discussion: The house was assessed at $11,082. After review, 16 acres were determined to be in a flood zone. An adjustment of 51% was applied to the 16 acres, making the new tax assessment $484,435. Decision: Mr. King made a motion to apply a 51% adjustment to the 16 acres in the flood zone making the tax assessment $484,435, Ms. Wilborn seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Taxpayer: SMITH KEVIN VERDI (CASSANDRA TAYLOR) 9:10AM Map # A83 14 Ms. Taylor stated the increase was not consistent with the neighborhood properties. An increase of 94% was not fair. Compared to adjoining lot, why not the same? Discussion: Staff explained that percentage of increase did not represent a valid appeal. Larger parcels are valued less per acre than smaller parcels based on current real estate analysis. Present Use Value was discussed. Taxpayer was aware of PUV and was working with the family on that option. Decision: Ms. Wilborn made a motion to uphold the tax assessment of $188,855. Mr. Stoltmann seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Page 2 of 4 Taxpayer: WALMART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST 9:37 AM Map #: 111 1 Walmart reviewed our property record card (PRC) and recommended a structure class change from shopping center to discount center. Changing to a discount center would yield a total value of $8,800,000. Walmart provided a spreadsheet of comparables indicating a range of $6.30 per ft to $59.86 per ft. Discussion: Walmart had just completed a $4,000,000 renovation in 2021. Comparables offered by Walmart were reviewed by tax office staff and several were verified to be vacant sales and therefore the data for comparables was deemed inaccurate and of limited use. Decision: Mr. Stoltmann made a motion to uphold the tax assessment of $17,449,679, Mr. Newell seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 4-1 vote. Ms. Wilborn voted against the motion. Taxpayer: NEWTON, JONATHAN & AMBER 10:06 AM Map #: A28 194 Mr. Newton discussed the effective year of their house of 2020. The house was built in 2001, and needed repairs. The windows leak when it rains. Roof needed replacing. Stated that he paid too much ($619,000), although this was a family sale. Discussion: The property had changed since original built, which included a new patio, porch, and new HVAC with split heat pump. A fee appraisal from 2013 indicated that the area over the garage was finished, bringing the total heated square footage to 3,400, not 2,457 as indicated by the current tax record. Homeowner restated 2,457 heated square foot was correct, and that the prior fee appraisal was in error. Decision: Mr. Newell made a motion to keep the heated sq ft at 2,457 and to change effective year to 2010 making the tax assessment $545,793. Ms. Wilborn seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Taxpayer: PHILLIPS, CLARENCE & BONNIE 10:28 AM Map #: A100 22 Mr. Phillips stated that this land was used for pasture and garden with no road frontage. It was landlocked by the front parcel (also owned by Mr. Phillips). Not suitable to build on. 17 miles out. Family land – no subdivision. Discussion: The land grade was verified to be similar to surrounding properties. Land had an adjustment of 10% for rear tract. Decision: Mr. Stoltmann made a motion to adjust land value by an additional 10% making the tax assessment $88,683, Ms. Wilborn seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Taxpayer: POWELL, TRAVIS & HELEN 10:50 AM Map #: A51 129 House built in 1997. Garage was added in 2001. The upstairs of the garage was finished in 2008. Metal building added in 2002. Mr. Powell researched sales using Red Fin. Seller v/s Buyer market. The cost of wood and other building materials are up. No money for repairs such as carpet replacement, roof replacement and floor repair. Discussion: Tax staff verified that a land adjustment of 5% was applied for rear location. Land was consistent with area (12G). Staff recommended changing detached garage to grade C. Decision: Mr. Stoltmann made a motion to adjust the detached garage grade from B to C making the tax assessment $428,702(detached garage $42,096), Mr. Newell seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Page 3 of 4 Taxpayer: POWELL, TRAVIS & HELEN 11:05 AM Map #: A51 186 Mr. Powell stated the land was very wet. Parcel intended for farm use only. The land had down hill slope toward the river. Mostly swamp. Discussion: Land was consistent with area (12G). Measure a 40 ft. drop from front to back of parcel. Great site to build a house. Fair value. Decision: Ms. Wilborn made a motion to uphold tax assessment $117,260. Mr. King seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Taxpayer: POWELL, TRAVIS & HELEN 11:13 AM Map #: A51 191 Mr. Powell stated this land was mostly wet and of an odd shape. The land was landlocked. Discussion: Part of the land was in a FEMA flood zone (4.5 acres) and currently had a 75% adjustment for this portion. Also, had 10% adjustment for rear location, however not land locked as owner having front parcel. Decision: Mr. King made a motion for an additional 10% adjustment due to rear location(total 20% adjustment) making the tax assessment $86,330, Mr. Newell seconded the motion, and motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Taxpayer: PARHAM, LEWIS & VALERIE 11:20 AM Map #: A69 295 Mr. Parham stated this land was underdeveloped. A huge gully runs through it. He used it for a dump for logs and wood chips. Only a small area was cleared. Land was meant to be for pasture, and passed down to family members. Discussion: 20% adjustment already in place for rear lot. Decision: Ms. Wilborn made a motion to uphold the tax assessment of $60,023, Mr. Stoltmann seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Taxpayer: PARHAM, LEWIS & VALERIE 11:35 AM Map #: A69 303 Mr. Parham stated this land was not comparable with surrounding land. Discussion: Very similar to A69 295. Decision: Mr. Stoltmann made a motion to uphold the tax assessment of $82,362, Ms. Wilborn seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Taxpayer: PARHAM, LEWIS & VALERIE 11:44 AM Map #: 67 31 Mr. Parham stated this land was not comparable with surrounding land. Discussion: Land not in FEMA. Land locked with no access and had 25% adjustment. Decision: Mr. Stoltmann made a motion to change the adjustment to 51% good(49% off) making the tax assessment $79,334, Ms. Wilborn seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. Taxpayer: PARHAM, LEWIS & VALERIE 11:50 AM Map #: 83 16 Mr. Parham stated the lot was unbuildable. Discussion: Lot had no adjustment and had road frontage. Small lot at .49 acres. Mr. Newell made the motion for both lots to be valued at $5,000. After further discussion, Mr. Newell withdrew his motion. Decision: Mr. Newell made a motion to make an adjustment of 51% (49% off) making the tax assessment $7,232, Mr. Stoltmann seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 4-1 vote. Mr. King voted against the motion. Page 4 of 4 PARHAM, LEWIS & VALERIE 11:50 AM Map #: 83 26 Mr. Parham agreed this lot was similar to 83 16. Discussion: Lot had an adjustment of 20% off due to rear location. Small lot at .29 acres. Mr. Newell made the motion for both lots to be valued at $5,000. After further discussion, Mr. Newell withdrew his motion. Decision: Mr. Newell made a motion to make an adjustment of 51% (49% off) making the tax assessment $5,435, Mr. Stoltmann seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 4-1 vote. Mr. King voted against the motion. PARHAM, LEWIS & VALERIE 12:06 PM Map #: 128 8 3 Mr. Parham stated that the house was in the process of being remodeled. The plumbing was not properly installed. Water damaged the floors. He was given a quote of $50,000 just for the floors. Ceilings are damaged, Discussion: Purchased as a foreclosure. Fee appraisal done in 2022. Electricity is on. Decision: Mr. Stoltmann made a motion to uphold the assessment of $183,005, Mr. Newell seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. PARHAM, LEWIS & VALERIE 12:12 PM Map #: 128 23 Mr. Parham stated the land was very wet. Water runs from neighboring property, washing away his land. Soil was inly good for a garden or drain field. Discussion: Soils indicate a buildable lot. Gulley on south side of lot needs an adjustment. Decision: Mr. Stoltmann made a motion to adjust the land value by applying a 90% good (10% adjustment) for topography/gulley issues making the tax assessment $27,426. Ms. Wilborn seconded the motion, and the motion carried with a 5-0 vote. At 12:28 pm, Mr. Stoltmann made a motion to recess. The next meeting is scheduled for June 10, 2025 at 9am.