ORDERS:
ORDER
This is a contested case brought by Leslie Smith, Lexington County Assessor
("Assessor"), against Gene Hendrix and Charles Hendrix ("Taxpayer") concerning property
valuations for the 1993, 1994, and 1995 tax years. The parties exhausted all prehearing remedies
with the Assessor and the County of Lexington Assessment Appeals Board ("Board").
Jurisdiction is granted to the Administrative Law Judge Division ("ALJD") by S.C. Code Ann.
§ 12-60-2540 (Supp. 1996).
This matter was heard on April 15, 1997. The parties stipulated that the file and the
exhibits exchanged between the parties would be made a part of the record and included as
evidence.
ISSUE
What is the proper valuation of Taxpayer's property, Tax Map # 004496-02-042, for the
1993, 1994, and 1995 tax years, which was valued at $127,400 during the county-wide
reassessment for the 1992 tax year?
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Gene Hendrix and Charles Hendrix, brothers, are the owners of the property which
is the subject of this case. The property is identified for tax purposes as Tax Map # 004496-02-042, located at 2437 Mineral Springs Road, Lexington County, South Carolina.
2. Lexington County conducted a county-wide reassessment of real property for the
1992 tax year, and determined the value of Taxpayer's property to be $226,000.
3. The Taxpayer appealed the Assessor's valuation for 1992 to the ALJD after
exhausting all prehearing remedies.
4. Judge Stevens of the ALJD issued an Order, dated November 27, 1995, in which
he found the value of Taxpayer's property to be $127,400 for the 1992 tax year. See Gene
Hendrix and Charles Hendrix v. Leslie Smith, Lexington County Assessor, 95-ALJ-17-0352-CC
(filed November 27, 1995).
In a subsequent order arising from the same matter, Judge Stevens remanded to the Board
the Taxpayer's challenge of the Assessor's valuations of the subject property for the 1993, 1994,
and 1995 tax years, as prehearing remedies were not exhausted on these disputed valuations
before reaching the ALJD. See Gene Hendrix and Charles Hendrix v. Leslie Smith, Lexington
County Assessor, 96-ALJ-17-0114-CC (filed August 27, 1996).
5. The Board heard the matter on remand and issued a decision on November 27,
1996. The Board decided that the property in question should be assessed for 1993, 1994, and
1995 at the rate set by Judge Stevens for 1992, as no reassessment program may be implemented
in a county unless all real property in the county is reassessed in the same year.
6. The Assessor appealed the Board's decision and this contested case ensued.
7. No county-wide reassessment program has occurred in Lexington County since
the 1992 reassessment program.
8. The Assessor appraised the subject property on December 31, 1991 and proffered
this appraisal as evidence in support of valuations for the tax years in question. The Assessor
inspected the subject property on May 15, 1996.
9. There has been no physical change or change in the use of Taxpayer's property
since the 1992 county-wide reassessment program.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISCUSSION
Section 12-43-210 is dispositive of the issue in the present case. This section provides, in
pertinent part, that: "No reassessment program may be implemented in a county unless all real
property in the county, including real property classified as manufacturing property, is reassessed
in the same year." S.C. Code Ann. § 12-43-210(B). It is undisputed that the Assessor disagrees
with the valuation of the subject property at $127,400, as determined by Judge Stevens for the
1992 tax year, the year of the reassessment program (Docket No. 95-ALJ-17-0352-CC). See
Petitioner's Preliminary Tax Statement (filed February 25, 1997) and Motion For Reconsideration
of November 30, 1995 filed with Judge Stevens in Gene Hendrix and Charles Hendrix v. Leslie
Smith, Lexington County Assessor, Docket No. 95-ALJ-17-0352-CC. Nonetheless, spot
reassessments are prohibited pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 12-43-210(B). Clearly, reassessments
may not be done unless all property in the county is reassessed in the same year, except in the
following situations. The Assessor may, without a county-wide reassessment, change the value
of a property previously assessed, when there has been a change in the use or condition of the
property [S.C. Code Ann. § 12-37-90 (Supp. 1996)] or when the property was omitted from the
tax rolls [S.C. Code Ann. § 12-39-220 (1976)]. Neither situation has been sufficiently established
in the case at hand. While the Assessor contends that the Taxpayer's rent stream has increased
since the 1992 valuation established by Judge Stevens' Order of 1995, such a rent increase does
not constitute a change in the use or condition of the property.
Through reassessment, the Assessor is in essence attempting to do that which it did not do
in 1995. That is, the Assessor seeks now to challenge the 1992 valuation, which it contends is
erroneous. As spot reassessments are generally prohibited, the Assessor is precluded from
reassessing Taxpayer's property for the 1993, 1994, and 1995 tax years. As such, the Taxpayer's
property should be assessed at $127,400 for the 1993, 1994, and 1995 tax years.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the property identified as TMS 004496-02-042 shall be
assessed at $127,400 for the 1993, 1994, and 1995 tax years.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________
JOHN D. GEATHERS
Administrative Law Judge
Post Office Box 11667
Columbia, SC 29211-1667
May 5, 1997
Columbia, South Carolina |