Clark County Board of Equalization Meeting – February 5, 2026
Clark County Board of Equalization Meeting – February 5, 2026
The Clark County Board of Equalization convened on February 5, 2026, at 8:00 AM at the Clark County Government Center. The board heard two property tax appeals, approved prior meeting minutes, and accepted a slate of Assessor-recommended valuation adjustments. All votes were unanimous unless noted.
Consent Calendar
- Agenda adoption: Approved unanimously.
- Approval of minutes: Minutes from the February 10, 2025 and February 13, 2025 Board of Equalization meetings were approved unanimously.
- Assessor Recommendations (Attachment 1): The board approved the Assessor’s recommended valuation adjustments for 27 parcels (listed on pages 5–7 of the agenda). The adjustments were based on findings that the previous valuations exceeded full cash value or were income-based, with reductions ranging from roughly $10,000 to $300,000. Specific examples include:
- Parcel 001-08-311-002 (McGuirk): land reduced from $153,125 to $109,375.
- Parcel 137-14-420-022 (Johnson): improvements reduced from $126,454 to $114,800.
- Parcel 160-14-316-034 (Jaret): improvements reduced from $546,638 to $479,500.
- Parcel 186-08-310-027 (BC Hwy Properties): improvements reduced from $166,521 to $109,138 (income-based reason).
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public comments were made at the beginning or end of the meeting.
Discussion Items
-
Case 496 – Wilson/Billy & Sherry (FY 2026‑2027): The petitioner (represented by Robert Apat) argued that the property’s taxable value of $1,413,839 exceeded its full cash value of approximately $1,289,620 based on a cost approach and sales comparison analysis. The Assessor’s Office, represented by Rachel Papazian, presented an equity grid and comparable sales analysis showing the value was in line with similar homes and below the median sale price of $1,663,000. The board noted the property was purchased in December 2025 for $1.7 million, which could reflect special demand. After deliberation, the board found the equity argument unsupported and accepted the Assessor’s recommendation (no change).
-
Case 211 – Hernandez Michelle (FY 2026‑2027): Petitioner Michelle Hernandez appealed the $583,998 valuation of her 2023‑built home in a neighborhood where most homes are 40‑70 years old. The Assessor’s comparable sales included homes from widely varying years (1975 to 2003). The board noted a lack of truly comparable new construction in the immediate area and that the property had been on the market for over a year before selling for $595,000. Chairman Dugan argued the property had economic obsolescence due to its location. After discussion, the board reduced the total taxable value to $525,000, citing the property’s superiority over a $500,000 sale on the same street but inferiority to newer homes in better areas.
Key Outcomes
- Case 496 (Wilson): Motion to accept the Assessor’s recommendation (no change to taxable value of $1,413,839) passed unanimously (5-0). The petitioner was informed of the right to appeal to the State Board.
- Case 211 (Hernandez): Motion to reduce the total taxable value from $583,998 to $525,000 passed unanimously (5-0). The reduction was based on full cash value considering the property’s condition and location.
- Remaining cases: The board accepted the Assessor’s recommendations for all other cases on the agenda (withdrawn, stipulated, or no-show petitioners) in a single unanimous motion (5-0). These included approximately 364 pending cases across subsequent hearing dates.
- Assessor Recommendations: The board approved the 27 stipulated adjustments without objection.
Meeting Transcript
Hello. Uh are you here to hear appeals? Yeah, come everybody, anybody that's going to come in front of this board, please move down to the front row. That way we don't have to wait for you to get down here when we're ready to go. Please. Tammy Campa. Here. Patrick Eckert. Here. Kristen Lowe. Here. Okay. Um, we got a possible action adopt the agenda. In a motion. So moved. Cast your votes. Oh, where's our votes at? Which one do I have for last? Okay. Motion carries. Okay. Okay, great. Thanks, Pat. All right. A section for public comment if there is any prior to starting the meeting. Okay. Let's swear in the petitioners and the members of the uh assessor's staff, please. Anybody that's gonna testify today. Is anybody testifying in the audience? Can you stand and raise your right hand, please? That's all right. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you solemnly swear that the testimony you're about to give during the course of this hearing is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you gone. Yeah. Thank you very much. Okay. Um from our famous district attorney, good morning. Good morning. The Nevada revised statutes allow individual taxpayers who feel their taxable value for the upcoming year is incorrect to appeal to the county board of equalization no later than January 15th. Please note that taxable value is not what you were charged on your tax bill. The county board of equalization has the authority to determine and then change and correct the value of any property that was assessed by the assessor. If the board finds it to be incorrect, they may change or correct any valuation they find to be incorrect by either adding to it or deducting from it the amount necessary to make it conform to the taxable value. The county board of equalization does not have the authority to lower taxes or make decisions based on comparisons of tax bills. There are only two situations in which the county board of equalization may reduce the assessment made by the county assessor when an inequity exists or when taxable value is higher than full cash value. Under NRS 361.356, if a taxpayer believes there is an inequity in the assessment and their property was assessed higher than another property that is identical in use and has a comparable location. Or they may raise or lower the value of the property that was used as the comparable property. Under NRS 361.357, if a taxpayer believes the full cash value of their property is less than the assessed taxable value for the fiscal tax year being appealed, the board may review the assessor's determination. If the board finds that the full cash value on January 1 prior to the fiscal year being appealed, is less than the taxable value, the board may correct the land value or fix a percentage of obsolescence that is to be deducted from the improvement value to ensure the total taxable value corresponds as closely as possible to its full cash value. Under NRS 361.355, if a taxpayer believes their property is overvalued by reason of another property being undervalued or not assessed, the board may examine any evidence submitted and make a determination. If the board finds the property complained of is undervalued or not assessed, they may increase the taxable value or place the property on the tax roll at its taxable value.
openpublica.com