Clark County Board of Equalization Meeting – February 19, 2026
Clark County Board of Equalization Meeting – February 19, 2026
The Clark County Board of Equalization met on February 19, 2026, at 8:00 AM at the Clark County Government Center to hear property tax appeals. The board heard two contested cases, Case 424 (2709 Pinto Lane Trust) and Case 828 (Triple A Nevada Trust), and disposed of numerous other appeals by stipulation, withdrawal, or petitioner absence. The meeting adjourned at approximately 11:44 AM.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public comments were made.
Discussion Items
Case 424: 2709 Pinto Lane Trust (Petitioner Mark Wolfson)
- Petitioner argued that the assessed value of his 4,985 sq ft custom home (built 2021, on 0.5 acres) was inequitable compared to similar properties in the neighborhood. He cited errors in the assessor's use of Marshall & Swift cost methodology, uneven application of supplemental assessments, and alleged inequities in land valuation (e.g., smaller lots assessed at same land value as larger lots). He presented extensive documentation over roughly 2.5 hours.
- The assessor's office (appraisers Jerrell Turner, Jamie Jacobs, Carla Pipitone) defended the valuation, stating that the property was assessed equitably using the statutory cost approach. They noted that the petitioner's arguments had been heard previously by both the county and state boards, and that the office had already made corrections to other properties based on his prior complaints.
- After rebuttal, the board voted unanimously to accept the assessor's recommendation of no change to the total taxable value of $1,687,686 (land $600,000; improvements $1,087,686).
Case 828: Triple A Nevada Trust (Petitioner Omar Peter)
- Petitioner expressed confusion over his property's value increasing from approximately $4.1 million (set by the State Board of Equalization in October 2025) to $5,480,604 for the 2026/2027 fiscal year. He argued that his home, located in an ungated area, had a higher taxable value than comparable luxury homes in gated communities like The Summit or MacDonald Highlands.
- The assessor's office (appraiser Rachel Papazian) explained that the 2025/2026 value (set by the state board) was under appeal and that the current year's value was a new, independently calculated amount using the cost approach. They presented equity grids and a sales analysis supporting the new value, noting that the property's large casitas and extra features contributed to its higher cost per square foot.
- The board voted unanimously to accept the assessor's recommendation of no change to the total taxable value of $5,480,604.
Remaining Cases
- A general motion was passed to accept the assessor's recommendations on all other agenda items where petitioners were absent, had stipulated, or had withdrawn. This covered dozens of cases listed on the agenda.
Key Outcomes
- Case 424: Board accepted assessor's valuation (no change). Petitioner was informed of the right to appeal to the State Board.
- Case 828: Board accepted assessor's valuation (no change). Petitioner was informed of the right to appeal.
- General Motion: All remaining cases were resolved by accepting the assessor's recommended values (either no change or stipulated reductions).
- Upcoming hearings were announced: February 23 (71 cases), February 24 (14 cases), and February 25 (19 cases).
Meeting Transcript
Tammy's not going to make the she just opened the shit. I mean the freeway is a big accent there. So everything's back. I take surface. I have to get off the surface for itself. Yeah. Good morning. This is the Clerk County Board of Equalization hearing for February 19th, 2026. County Clerk has informed us that this meeting has been posted and properly noticed. At this time, can we please call the roll? Terry Farr. Present. Timothy Albert. Present. Patrick Eger. Present. And Tammy Kempa and Suzette Wheeler are not present. Thank you. I motion to adopt the agenda. Please cast your votes. Okay, I gotta get to the vote thing here. I may get off the screen. What is that? Shift. Alt screen. Alt tab. Well alt tab. Oh, there we go. I wasn't signed in. I'm not just a pretty face. There we go. And that motion passes. Uh before we start, microphone is open for any public comment. Seeing none, I will close the microphone. This time we need to swear in the petitioners. Anyone who intends to testify on behalf of the petitioners and members of the assessor's office, please stand and face the county clerk to be sworn in. Do 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 go. Thank you. Now we have a statement from the district attorney's office. The Nevada revised statutes allow individual taxpayers who feel their taxable value for the upcoming tax years incorrect to appeal to the County Board of Equalization no later than January 15th. Please note taxable value is not what you are 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, the board may review the assessor's determination. If the board finds the assessment of taxable value is not equitable, they may raise or lower the value of the land or improvements or both, 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 the January 1st 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 then make a determination.
openpublica.com